Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts

okładka CROSS BORDER COOPERATION STRATEGY OF THE LUBELSKIE VOIVODESHIP, LVIV, VOLYN AND BREST OBLASTS

FOR 2014 – 2020 „Working Group for the development of the „Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014 – 2020””

Lubelskie Voivodeship Bogdan Kawałko, Dorota Skwarek, Magdalena Fotek – Kułak, Olga Grzechnik, Mo- nika Majewska, Bartosz Tereszczuk, Magdalena Figura – Wrona (Regional Policy Department of Lubelskie Voivodeship Marshal Ofﬁ ce)

Brest Oblast Yuri Kolesov (Brest Oblast Executive Committee), Nikolaj Kuzmicki (Centre for Dis- semination of Information and Education in the Brest Department of the Ministry for Extraordinary Situations), Aleksandr Pańko (Brest University)

Lviv Oblast Diana Kodrowa (Lviv Oblast State Administration), Liudmyla Oldak (Lviv Oblast Council)

CROSS BORDER COOPERATION STRATEGY

OF THE LUBELSKIE VOIVODESHIP, LVIV, Volyn Oblast Natalia Krolik, Walentyna Gnasiuk – Terlecka (Volyn Oblast State Administration), Alla Yatseniuk (Volyn Oblast Council) VOLYN AND BREST OBLASTS

FOR 2014-2020 Coordinator Bogdan Kawałko (Regional Policy Department of the Lubelskie Voivodeship Marshal Ofﬁ ce in Lublin)

External expert prof. Andrzej Miszczuk (University of Warsaw)

Cooperation: Participation in the working group and preparation of materials for the diagnostic part: Krzysztof Markowski, Andrzej Matacz, Andrzej Jakubowski, Jerzy Greszta (Statistical Of- ﬁ ce in Lublin),Ofﬁ ce for Spatial Planning in Lublin The Cross Border Association Euroregion Bug in Chełm

ISBN 978 - 83 - 942280 -2 -6

Lubelskie Voivodeship Marshal Ofﬁ ce in Lublin ul. Spokojna 4, 20-074 Lublin www.lubelskie.pl

DTP and print: 29 COLORS ul. Lubelska 29, 71 - 043 Szczecin www.29colors.pl

Lublin, April 2014

2 3

Introduction

Border areas, owing to their special role played in various development processes, are of key importance to regional policy both on the European Union level as well as in particular states and regions. In the case of border regions, the efﬁ ciency of that policy depends largely on developing joint, long-term cross border cooperation attitudes that could be expressed and encapsulated in proper strategic documents.

„Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014-2020” is a document which speciﬁ es the goals and directions of the development of cross border cooperation. It constitutes another crucial step towards deepening the cooperation initiated in the middle of the 1990s of the XX century between the Lubelskie Voivodeship and the neighboring oblasts in the Ukraine and Belarus. It is, at the same time, the ﬁ rst such European-level document prepared for the cross border area located along the external border of the EU.

The Strategy document, accepted by the authorities of the partner oblasts: Volyn and Lviv in the Ukraine and the Brest Oblast in Belarus, is a result of work initiated by the Lubelskie Voivodeship authorities at the request of the Marshal.

The Strategy is an effect of joint efforts conducted with partners from the Volyn Oblast Council, Lviv Oblast Council, Lviv State Administration, Volyn Oblast State Administration and the Brest Oblast Executive Committee, which, in itself, is an important fulﬁ llment of interregional cooperation agreements signed between the Lubelskie Voivodeship and the neighboring regions. This initiative has also obtained aid and ﬁ nancial support of the Republic of Poland’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs as part of the competition „Support of the civic and self-government dimension of the Polish foreign policy in 2013”, within which a project was published entitled: „Building partnerships for the development of the Cross Border Strategy for 2014-2020”.

The goals prepared and included in the Strategy are adequate to the most relevant development problems and challenges that were identifi ed and confi rmed in the social consultations process. They are oriented toward effective use of endogenous potentials in the scope of economic cooperation, tourism and scientifi c opportunities as well as mitigating limitations inherent to the external EU border through the improvement of external and internal transport accessibility.

We hope that the „Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014-2020” will fulﬁ ll both the joint expectations as well as its role in the dynamic shaping of the future of our regions. Realization of the Strategy shall prepare the cross border area regions for the new European Neighborhood Policy in the 2014-2020 perspective and for more effective use of the funds of the Cross Border Cooperation Programme Poland-Bela- rus-Ukraine 2014-2020, which shall contribute to improving its competitiveness and attractiveness in a European dimension.

April 2014

6 7 Table of Contents 1.INTRODUCTION...... 9 1.1. Premises and circumstances of Strategy’s development...... 9

1.2. Strategy preparation methodology...... 13

1.3. Development of regions and cross border cooperation – European experiences...... 19

2. CROSS BORDER COOPERATION POTENTIAL...... 25

2.1. Economic potential...... 25

2.2. Ecological potential...... 39 2.3. Socio-demographic potential...... 47 1.1 2.4. Infrastructure potential...... 63 1. 2.5. Tourism potential...... 75 INTRODUCTION 2.6. Summary – SWOT analysis of the cross border region...... 83 3.GOALS AND DIRECTIONS OF CROSS BORDER COOPERATION...... 87 REMISES AND 3.1. General Strategy objective...... 87 P

3.2. Goals and directions of cooperation within strategic activities...... 89 3.2.1. Economic cooperation...... 90 CIRCUMSTANCES OF 3.2.2. Natural environment, culture and tourism...... 91 3.2.3 Transport and border infrastructure...... 94 TRATEGY S DEVELOPMENT 3.2.4. Science and higher education...... 96 S ’

4. IMPLEMENTATION SYSTEM...... 99

5. SOURCES OF FINANCING...... 101

6. MONITORING SYSTEM...... 103

7. WORKING ON THE STRATEGY...... 105

8. ANNEX...... 109 List of the submitted recommended projects...... 110 Economic cooperation...... 110 Natural environment, culture and tourism...... 110 Transport and border infrastructure...... 111 Science and higher education...... 111 Statistical annex...... 112 Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Economy...... 112 Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014-2020, constitutes another Environment and environmental protection...... 116 crucial step towards deepening cross border cooperation initiated Population and work resources...... 117 in the middle of the 1990s of the XX century between the Lubelskie Transport and border infrastructure...... 133 Voivodeship and the neighboring oblasts in the Ukraine and Belarus. Higher education, tourism and culture...... 133

8 Considering the strategic partnership of Poland and Ukraine as well as the important role of cross border cooperation with Belarus, there is a need to create long-term cooperation-oriented attitudes in the Lubelskie Voivodeship and three border regions. Currently the cross border location, to a large extent, has been contributing to the peripheral nature 11.1. of these regions and was one of the Considering that the analyzed area is located on both sides of the key causes of development diver- external EU border, the prepared document, elaborating on the possibility gence in comparison to remaining to realize joint strategic cross border undertakings, is not only unique but regions of particular countries. Stra- becomes a model from the point of view of the European Neighborhood tegic preparation of the cross border Strategic preparation of the cross border Policy. cooperation creates the possibility to cooperation creates the possibility to treat treat the cross border location as a chance to develop. the cross border location as a chance to The disadvantage of the documents prepared so far regarding the cross border cooperation of the Lubelskie Voivodeship was that they were created at the  he main premises for the prepa- develop. Polish initiative with the lack of real (and not only formal) engagement from the ration of cross border cooper- Belarusian and Ukrainian side. Furthermore, they presented rather general di- ation Strategy of the Lubelskie rections for taking action and not included any elements of an implementation Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and system (implementing entities, monitoring system etc.)1. The current document is Brest Oblasts for 2014-2020 include: created with approval of the authorities of the Brest, Lviv and Volyn Oblasts and the self-government of the Lubelskie Voivodeship as well as the Cross-Border As-  building positive attitudes towards European integration processes; sociation Euroregion BUG. It constitutes the fulfi llment of partnership agreements concluded between the Lubelskie Voivodeship and:  joining the Eastern Partnership Programme, which is an important priority for Poland and one of the priorities of the European Union;  Brest Oblast on the cross border cooperation dated 31 March, 2000,  preparation of the cooperation model and preparation of the regions to new  Volyn Oblast on the economic, trade, scientifi c-technical and cultural cooper- European Neighborhood Policy in the 2014-2020 perspective, all of which ation dated 1 October, 2002, should translate into better use of cross border development potential of the neighboring regions.  Lviv Oblast on the economic, trade, scientifi c-technical and cultural cooperation dated 16 October, 2004. It is worth emphasizing, that the cross border cooperation of the Lubel- skie Voivodeship can boast over 20 years of tradition. Since 1992 the Pol- Moreover, it is the expanded and a more detailed version of the Lubelskie ish-Ukrainian-Belarus cross border regions shaped different forms of cooperation. Voivodeship Development Strategy for 2014 (with perspective to 2030) adapted Formally, one may separate its two main sources resulting from the legal-systemic by the Sejmik (regional parliament) of the Lubelskie Voivodeship on June 24, 2013. conditions into intergovernmental as well as (government)-self-governmental cooperation. The fi rst one is related to the functioning of the government administra- Success of the Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivode- tion and is represented by: ship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014-2020 depends, to a large extent, on the real political will of the authorities of the Brest, Lviv and Volyn Oblasts to  Polish – Belarusian Intergovernmental Coordinating Commission for Cross implement this document. The evidence for their engagement was the acknowl- Border Cooperation, created in 1992, edgement and preparation of both the diagnostic as well as the directional part by Belarusian, Ukrainian and Polish experts during working group meetings as  Polish – Intergovernmental Coordinating Council for Interregional Cooperation, well as participation in social consultations. The principle of concentration was created in 1993, strictly observed in relation to previous strategic documents regarding cross border cooperation, which translated into the selection of only a few most important The second effort is related to the activity of the units of territorial self-gov- domains of strategic activities, developed in a small number of directions that are ernment that were supported, especially in the initial stages, by the government worth pursuing. administration, which in 1995 resulted in the creation of the Cross Border Asso- ciation Euroregion BUG. The public administrative reform and the creation of the Though still a major challenge, the opportunity offered by the neighbor voivodeship self-government in 1999 made this new entity play an important role status generates significant possibilities of activating Polish and neighboring in cross border cooperation. It is also worth mentioning that the Cross-Border border regions, mainly by the development of different forms of cross border Association Euroregion BUG was created at the initiative of the Lubelski self-gov- cooperation. The cross border cooperation of the Polish, Ukrainian and Be- ernment. The organization groups self-governments engaged in cross border co- larusian regions should concentrate mainly on the realization of emerging operation from the Lubelskie Voivodeship. joint initiatives serving the whole border-divided region and building contacts between societies residing on both sides of the border The commitment to prepare the Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014-2020 is a new qual- Such activities, to a large extent, can obtain relevant cooperation from the Eu- ity of cross border cooperation and a challenge to both the Lubelskie self-gov- ropean Union. That includes funds and initiatives of the European Commission di- ernment as well as the authorities of the Brest, Lviv and Volyn Oblasts and the rected towards these goals through specially constructed EU support programmes, Cross-Border Association Euroregion BUG, including an eponymous organization concentrating, on one hand, on the improvement of the security and border control aimed at changing the character of the external EU border and increasing the and, on the other hand, on socio-economic development of border regions. competitiveness of the cross border region.

1 An example of such activities is, inter alia: Strategia rozwoju Euroregionu Bug (Develop- ment strategy of Euroregion Bug), Wydawnictwo Norbertinum, Lublin 1997, 295 pages, prepared within the ordered research project PBZ -059-01.

10 11 1.1.2 INTRODUCTION STRATEGY PREPARATION METHODOLOGY

Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014-2020 is a programme promoting the development potential of the cross border area designed to boost its competitiveness and break the currently negative effect of the border barrier.

12 13 11.2. The time horizon of the Strategy includes a 7-year Therefore, it may not take the shape of a classic planning document programming period, consistent with the EU fi nancial created for the needs of a uniform administrative setting. It should have a functional character and should constitute, fi rst of all, an attempt to create perspective for 2014-2020, while the spatial scope a coherent set of ideas and propositions for the interested regions of all encompasses Lubelskie Voivodeship, Brest, Volyn three states. and Lviv Oblasts (fi g. 1.1.). These neighboring

As mentioned above, the basic principles related to the preparation and reali- regions are also part of the Cross-Border zation of the document include: Association Euroregion BUG2.  cooperation and consideration of strategic goals for the cooperation of cross border regions;

 preparation of development priorities and a catalogue of undertakings leading It is worth emphasizing, however, that the Cross Border Cooperation Strategy to the change of the cross border regions’ function and to their broader open- of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Brest, Volyn and Lviv Oblast for 2014-2020 is not ing to cooperation and mutual benefi ts; a document prepared by for regional administrative units, since they are treated jointly as one cross border area (region). Thus defi ned, cross border cooperation  stimulating the development processes of border regions; covers the area of 99.9 thousand km2, with 25.1 thousand km2 being on Polish side (i.e. 25.2% of the analyzed area and 8.0% of the territory of Poland), Belaru-  promoting good neighborly relations in the border regions; sian side – 32.8 thousand km2 (i.e. 32.8% of the analyzed area and 15.8% of the territory of Belarus), while on the Ukrainian side – 42.0 km2 (i.e. 42% of the ana-  improvement of effi ciency and promotion of the region and its ability to attract lyzed area and 15.8% of Ukrainian territory). It is populated by 7 142.8 thousand external investments; persons, with the Lviv Oblast representing 35.6%, Lubelskie Voivodeship – 30.4%, Brest Oblast – 19.5% and Volyn Oblast – 14.5%. The average population density  preparation of tasks and priorities of a new European Neighborhood Policy in the cross border region amounts to 72 persons per 1 km2. and a new Cross Border Cooperation Programme Poland-Belarus-Ukraine. Despite the fact that the cross border area encompassed by the Strategy The process of creating the Strategy document is based on fi ve main princi- includes three borders i.e. Polish-Belarusian, Polish-Ukrainian and Belaru- ples. These are: sian-Ukrainian, only two of them have been taken into consideration i.e. Pol- ish-Belarusian and Polish-Ukrainian since they constitute external parts of the EU  partnership principle, signifying the joint and equal engagement of Polish, Be- border. The notion of cross border cooperation has also been narrowed to these larusian and Ukrainian partners, two border sections.

 coherence principle of other strategic documents prepared on a regional, national and European levels,

 ﬂ exibility principle based on adjusting to the changing external conditions and endogenous potential, which marks the necessity to monitor the realization of documents and, if so required, to perform updates,

 principle of thematic concentration selects several areas most important to the functioning of the cross border region and outlines spatial concentration by indicating the cross border areas of strategic intervention (TOSI), within which the realization of the strategic directions shall be undertaken,

 the data credibility principle as regards the data used in the process of creating the document, coming both from statistical and other sources.

The Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014-2020 is being prepared with the use of the expert-participation method that is not only recommended by the national and Euro- pean institutions but also commonly applied and veriﬁ ed by local, regional, national and European strategic documents. Its advantage is the combination of expert knowledge, priorities and evaluations formulated by implementing social and local entities. This means that the document’s draft is prepared by experts, who in key issues draw on the decisions of public entities and opinions of social entities that 2 The Cross Border Association Euroregion Bug does not include the entire Lviv Oblast, but shall be responsible for its realization. only two of its border districts: Sokalski and Żółkiewski, however, due to the potential of Lviv Oblast as well as the strength of its effect on the Lubelskie Voivodeship it was decid- ed to include the entire Lviv Oblast.

14 15 cooperation within the cross border region the relevant element of which is the Fig. 1.1. Administrative division of the cross border region statistical annex. Diagnostic part is summarized by the strategic SWOT analysis for that area and the identifi cation of domains for strategic actions. The basic source of data used for diagnostic purposes were the resources of public statistics of Poland, Belarus The basic source of data used for and Ukraine i.e. Statistical Offi ce in diagnostic purposes were the resources Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of public statistics of Poland, Belarus and of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Sta- Ukraine tistical Offi ce of the Volyn Oblast. In the case of lack of comparable statistical data or their incomplete comparability, resulting from different research methods used in Public Statistics in Poland, Belarus and Ukraine, the used data were marked with appropriate metadata indicating the character and scope of methodological differences.

In the second (directional) part – the general goal of the Strategy was formulated and an analysis was performed of particular areas, which made it possible to specify detailed objectives, directions and effects of activities. Moreover, a system of indicators was identiﬁ ed, which will serve the monitoring of the Strat- egy’s realization and an outline was presented of the document realization system and its sources of ﬁ nancing. Additionally, a list of announced projects was prepared in the form of an attachment.

Złoczów Золочів

- stolice województw/obwodów

- na prawach powiatu/rejonu - stolice powiatu/rejonu o liczbie mieszk. pow. 30 tys. - stolice powiatu/rejonu o liczbie mieszk. od 15 do 30 tys. - stolice powiatu/rejonu Ryki o liczbie mieszk. do 15 tys.

Granice państwowe

Granice regionów

Source: Own work,2014

The document presenting the Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014-2020 is coherent with the strategic documents prepared on the European and national level for the requirements of the 2014-2020 perspective. The most important European document dealing with this issue is Europa 2020 strategy for intelligent and balanced development conducive to social inclusion, from which it is possible to extract, among other things, the objectives of a new European Neighborhood Policy. What is relevant for the Polish documents is, among other things: Mid-term Nation- al Development Strategy 2020, National Strategy for Regional Development for 2020 and the National Spatial Development Concept 2030. In relation to the mentioned documents a Development Strategy for the Lubelskie Voivodeship has been prepared for 2014 (with perspective to 2030) and an upgrade was performed of the Eastern Poland Development Strategy 2020. Strategic documents have also been included regarding the Brest, Lviv and Volyn Oblasts. Agreements were also included, made within the Polish – Belarusian Intergovernmental Coordina- tion Commission for Cross Border Cooperation and the Polish – Ukrainian Inter- governmental Coordinating Council for Interregional Cooperation.

Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014-2020 consists of two major parts i.e. diagnostic and directional. The diagnostic part includes the analysis of potentials and barriers for

16 17 1.1.3 INTRODUCTION DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONS AND CROSS BORDER COOPERATION – EUROPEAN EXPERIENCE

The cross border region is a geographic area the distinguishing feature of which is its location along both sides of national borders. It consists of border regions (areas) belonging to the neighboring states.

18 19 reverse e.g. demographic phenomena in border regions.

The coexistence phase can be labeled as the information exchange phase. It manifests itself on different plains and between different entities. Its purpose is to teach about partners from the other side of the border, the way the public admin- 11.3. istration is organized, customs, legal regulations and other regulations related to economic activity, tourist attractions, tangible and intangible culture. Its specifi c attributes include3: The cooperation border phase deepens the intensity of cross border contacts. Their areas of interest include, fi rst of all: public safety related to counteracting the  geographical (geopolitical) location, effects of natural disasters as well as crime, education, scientifi c research, culture and sports. Trade also develops, including spontaneous not recorder trade driven  character of the state border, by price differential on both sides of the border.

 differences in the development level and in the functioning of the economy of The function fulﬁ lled by the border in the co-existence and cooperation phas- the neighboring regions (economic distance), es can be described as fragmentary, as stipulated by J.Rosenau, which translates into opening to some external factors or differentiating openness towards  institutional distance, related to the inadequate competence of neighboring particular countries6. The co-dependence stage is about further strengthening of administrative regions and subregional entities, the bond within the cross border region, by technological links, capital links, ﬂ ow of employees, partnership-based joint undertakings. The border, while facilitating  differences in the status of economic activity in relation to the cross bor- integration, acquires imperceptible quality, which should be treated as a certain der regions of neighboring states, desired target status. Achieving this status is possible in conditions of advanced economic integration of states which are on the stage of economic union or cus-  socio-cultural environment related to social and ethnic minorities and stereo- toms union and have a common market. types related to people living in the neighboring areas.

Geopolitical conditions are the most important factor inﬂ uencing the functioning of the cross border region, moreover, they determine the character and func- tions of the national border. It is generally assumed that the ultimate goal is an The transition process from a separating border open and imperceptible border. Arriving at that status is a process that consists of - according to O.Martinez4 – the following stages: (closed border), through ﬁ ltering border to a

 hostility border stage, connecting (open) border has a long-term and, not necessarily, one-directional character. Viewing the  coexistence border stage, Polish-Belarusian border and the Polish-Ukrainian  cooperation border stage, border through the prism of the above considerations  codependence border stage. it becomes obvious that both of them cannot

The hostility stage is generally a consequence of violent political events, relat- proceed to the co-existence stage (table 1.1.). ed to the threat to the state’s existence or inviolability of its territory and borders. The aftermath is that the state border causes separation and contributes to disintegration, which translates into breaking all international contacts including cross border contacts. Such a state of affairs may be the consequence of international sanctions imposed on a given state5. A positive example of breaking the border barrier is the Euregio initiative that was born in 1958 at the German-Netherlands border and was aimed at creating a Transition from the hostility stage to the coexistence stage requires time. It structure of cooperation between the border regions. Similar economic structure is easier in a situation when one of the impulses to initiate cooperation between that required changes (traditional textile industry center) was conducive to initiat- cross border regions is exceeding outside the functional space (economic, so- ing that cooperation. Other favorable factors included: similar cultural background cio-cultural etc.) as well as the state borders and the hostility stage did not last (lack of linguistic barrier, mixed marriages etc.) lack of marked institutional dis- long enough to cause irreparable damages or consequences that are difﬁ cult to tance, especially on the level of subregional units, with the main barrier being the reluctance of the Dutch society towards Germans, which was the consequence 3 Z.Chojnicki, 1998, Uwarunkowania rozwoju regionu nadgranicznego – koncepcje i of the II world war. założenia teoretyczne (Conditions for the development of cross border region – concepts and theoretical assumptions) [in:] B.Gruchman, J.Parysek (eds.), Studia rozwoju i zagosp- odarowania przestrzennego (Studies in development and spatial planning), Wydawnictwo AE, Poznań, page 11-48, A.Miszczuk, 2013, Uwarunkowania peryferyjności regionu przy- granicznego (Peripheral conditions of the cross border region), Norbertinum, Lublin, page 59-63. 4 O. Martinez, 1994, The dynamics of border interaction: new approaches to border analysis [in:] C.H.Schoﬁ eld (ed.): Global Boundaries, World Boundaries, vol. I, Routledge, Lon- don, page 1-15 5 A.Moraczewska, 2008, Transformacja funkcji granic Polski (Functional transformation of 6 A.Moraczewska, 2008, Transformacja funkcji granic Polski (Functional transformation of Polish borders), Wydawnictwo UMCS, Lublin, page 28. Polish borders), Wydawnictwo UMCS, Lublin, page 28.

20 21  defeating the location deﬁ cits and taking opportunities to improve the transport Table 1.1. Evolution of the phases of the Polish-Belarusian and Polish-Ukrainian border. infrastructure and support the attractiveness of regions and joint economic development,

Polish-Soviet border:  strengthening the cross border environmental and nature protection, period phase function  supporting cross border cultural cooperation, from 1945 to 1950 coexistence fragmentary  from 1951 to 1990/1991 hostility disintegration partnership and aid (subsidiarity), understood as basic principles of functioning of cross border regions and subregional units but also the state and Euro- Granica polsko-białoruska pean institutions.

period phase function On the basis of many years of experience of particular Euroregions and the from 1991 to 2004 coexistance with elements of fragmentary Association of European Border Regions, the charter describes also the beneﬁ ts cooperation to the border regions that are brought about by cross border cooperation. These beneﬁ ts can also be illustrated by pointing to generated added value or synergy from 2004 to 2007 coexistance with elements of fragmentary effect of that cooperation (table 1.2.). cooperation since 2007 coexistance with elements of fragmentary cooperation Table 1.2. Added value (synergy effect) of the cross border cooperation of border territorial entities. Granica polsko-ukraińska period phase function List Manifestations

from 1991 to 2004 coexistance with elements of fragmentary European value cooperation of citizens of border regions contributes to supporting cooperation freedom, safety and observing human rights, from 2004 to 2007 coexistance with elements of fragmentary Political value input into building and integrating Europe, learning, understand- cooperation ing and building trust, implementing the principles of subsidiarity and partnership, strengthening the economic and social coher- since 2007 coexistance with elements of fragmentary ence and cooperation, preparation for the accession of new EU cooperation members, Institutional value active participation of society, governmental and self-governmen- Source: Own work. tal institutions, political and social groups on both sides of the border, disseminating knowledge regarding the neighbor, lasting cross border cooperation in effective structures, joint preparation, fi nancing and realization of cross border programmes and pro- European region i.e. Euregio7 became the roll model for all other cross bor- jects, der structures emerging later. It is also an example of breaking the reluctance Socio-economic mobilizing the local potential to create partners who stimulate between nations and regional communities. With its actions it has contributed to value cross border cooperation, cooperation of partners from the eco- stimulating the socio-economic restructuring. At present, Euregio includes 140 nomic and social sphere, opening labor markets and stimulating municipalities, town/cities and German and Dutch districts with the total area of growth of professional qualifi cations, additional developmental 13 thousand km2, with a population of 3.37 million people (53% of whom are effects including infrastructure, transport, tourism, environment, Dutch and 47% - Germans). The highest authority of Euregio is a council consist- education, scientifi c research, entrepreneurship and creating ad- ing of 41 Dutch and 41 German members - elected indirectly, proportionately to ditional jobs in those spheres, the number of citizens from municipal councils, towns and districts. The execu- Socio-cultural value disseminating, in a constant and repetitive way, information about tive bodies include the cabinet and secretariat. One should also mention working the geographic, structural, economic, socio-cultural and historical groups (everyday border related problems, health protection, disaster protection) status of border and cross border regions (also via media), their and commissions (economy, transport, social, technological, agriculture and spa- complete presentation in cartographic publications, in school tial order, education, sports and culture, tourism). books, formation of a circle of experts in education, culture etc. equal rights and dissemination of language of the neighboring The phenomenon of creating new cross border regions has markedly gained country, inclusion of dialects as constituent parts of the cross bor- in intensity. In 1980 there were 40 such regions, in 2000 – 120, and currently der regional development enabling mutual communication. around 200 in different stages of institutionalization. Without doubt, the abolish- ment of borders with the introduction of the Schengen Area is benefi cial to the Source: Own work on the basis of: Karty Europejskich Regionów Granicznych i Transgranicznych cross border regions created along the internal borders of the EU. What remains (Charter of Frontier and Transfrontier Regions) (2004). a problem, however, is the cooperation along the external EU border. The cross border cooperation described in the European Charter of Frontier and Transfron- tier Regions (2004) applies to both external and internal border and sets out the following objectives: The preparation of the Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie  new quality of borders, which should have the potential to unite and facilitate Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014-2020 is supposed to contrib- interactions, ute to achieving, at least, part of this type of benefi ts on the Polish-Belarusian and Polish-Ukrainian border region.  evening out the „seams” of European spatial policy,

7 Hence the term Euroregion, which is being currently widely used.

22 23 2.2.1 CROSS BORDER COOPERATION POTENTIAL

ECONOMIC POTENTIAL

GDP is the basic indicator of economic potential. GDP on the analyzed cross border area in 2010 amounted to 23125.6 million Euro (table 2.1), with half of that amount generated on the territory of the Lubelskie Voivodeship (58.2%).

24 25 2.2.1 Fig. 2.1. The mid-year national GDP growth between 2004-2010 (current prices). The share of the remaining regions being a part of the analyzed cross border region was far smaller, Brest Oblast - 18.8%, Lviv Oblast 17.1% and Volyn Oblast - 5.9%.

Table 2.1. Gross Domestic Product in 2010 (current prices).

Gross Domestic Product List total (mln euro) per 1 inhabitant (in euro) Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce of the Volyn Poland 352 881 9 240,9 Oblast. Lubelskie Voivodeship 13 462,2 6 247,4

Belarus 41 613,5 4 384,6

Brest Oblast 4 346,3 3 111,4 Synthetic indicator of the economic strength, i.e. value of the national GDP Ukraine 102 616,3 2 237,1 per one inhabitant, is at a level markedly lower than national average in the case of all of the analyzed administrative units. In 2010 in the Lubelskie Voivodeship Lviv Oblast 3 949,1 1 550,4 this indicator was at the level of 6247 euro and reached 67.6% of the average Volyn Oblast 1 368,0 1 319,3 Polish GDP (ranking Poland second to last from among 16 voivodeships), in the Brest Oblast – 3111 euro, which constituted 71.0% of the Belarus’s average (5th Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of place from among 7 administrative units), in the Lviv Oblast – 1550 euro, while in the Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce of the Volyn Oblast. Offi cial exchange rate of national currencies in relation to Euro according to the European the Volyn Oblast – 1319 euro which constituted 69.3% and 59.0% of the Ukrainian Commission,http://ec.europa.eu/budget/contracts_grants/info_contracts/inforeuro/ inforeuro_en.cfm national average respectively (ranking them 14th and 22nd from the total of 27 (accessed: 22 August 2013). regions). A relatively weak level of economic development of regions constituting part of the analyzed cross border area becomes even more evident, when the values presented above are juxtaposed with the average value of GDP per capita in the European Unionj2. In the Lubelskie Voivodeship, which is one of the poorest regions in the EU, the value of this indicator constitutes 25.5% of EU average. In The share of Lubelskie Voivodeship in Polish GDP in 2010 was 3.8%, Brest the case of the remaining regions being part of the analyzed cross border area the Oblast’s share in GDP of Belarus - 10.5% while in the Lviv and Volyn Oblasts it relation of GDP per one inhabitant in relation to the EU average was even lower amounted to 3.8% and 1.3% of Ukrainian GDP respectively. These results should and amounted to 12.7% in the Brest Oblast, 6.3% in Lviv Oblast and 5.4% in the be considered as relatively low, taking into consideration the fact that the pop- case of the Volyn Oblast. ulation potential of the abovementioned regions constitutes about: 5.6% of the country’s population in Lubelskie Voivodeship, 14.7% in Brest Oblast, 5.6% in Lviv Oblast and 2.3% in Volyn Oblast. The analyzed regions were characterized by diverse growth dynamics against the backdrop of the countries of reference (fi g. 2.1.). In real terms, the mid-year estimated GDP of the Lubelskie Voivodeship between 2004-2010 amounted to 3.5% against 4.6% in Poland, while in the Lviv Oblast – 1.2% against 3.1% in the Ukraine. Both these regions show a relatively stable tendency for divergence, i.e. deepening of development disproportions in relation to the countries of reference. Brest Oblast recorded a mid-year GDP growth similar to national GDP between 2009-20111 4.4% against 4.5% in Bela- rus), while the only region being part of the analyzed cross border area in which the GDP growth was generally above the national average was the Volyn Oblast (4.4% against 3.1% in the Ukraine).

1 First data regarding GDP for particular oblasts in Belarus come from 2009. 2 For 27 member states. Data for 2010.

26 27 Fig. 2.2. The GDP per one inhabitant (according to the purchasing power parity) in relation to the EU average in 2010. Fig. 2.3. Gross Domestic Product per capita in 2010 (according to the purchasing power parity). .

Source: Own work on the basis of the data provided by Eurostat, Main Statistical Ofﬁ ce, National Statistical Committee of Ukraine and the National Statistical Committee of the Republic of Belarus. In order to ensure the comparability of the data, the World Bank’s purchasing power parity indices were used.

Disproportions in the level of economic development between the EU average and the remaining regions that are part of the analyzed cross border area become smaller if the basis for comparison is the GDP value expressed in euro according to the purchasing power parity (fi g. 2.2). Considering the population’s purchasing power, GDP per capita in the Lubelskie Voivodeship in 2010 amounted to 42% of the EU average (Poland – 63%), Brest Oblast – 31% (Belarus – 44%), Lviv Oblast – 15%, while in the Volyn Oblast - 12% (Ukraine – 21%). In the Source: Own work on the basis of the data provided by Eurostat, Main Statistical Offi ce, National general classifi cation including 348 statistical units of regional level in the Statistical Committee of Ukraine and the National Statistical Committee of the Republic of Belarus. In order to ensure the comparability of the data the World Bank’s purchasing power parity indices were European Union (NUTS2) and all oblasts of Ukraine and Belarus, Lubelskie used. Voivodeship ranks on a distant 302 spot for GDP according to the purchasing power parity per inhabitant, Brest Oblast – per 315, Lviv Oblast – 335 while the Volyn Oblast – 343. Regardless of the applied comparison method, the analyzed administrative units are among the least developed regions in Europe, as well as in the remaining countries of reference (fi g. 2.3). On the analyzed cross border area services had the biggest signifi cance in generating gross added value, the share of which in the gross value structure as per types of activity in 2010 was 61.4%. The share of services in generating gross added value were at the level markedly exceeding 60% in the case of Polish and Ukrainian part of the analyzed area, however, it was much lower in the case of the Brest Oblast where, only around 40% of the region’s gross added value was generated. The role of industry in generating gross added value of the analyzed cross border area was 20.4%, while its relevance was much bigger in the case of the Brest Oblast - where 34.0% of the region’s added value as generated in this sector. The share of industry in the structure of gross added value in the remaining territorial units was much lower i.e. 15.6% in the Volyn Oblast to 19% in the Lubelskie Voivodeship. Despite the fact that the share of agriculture, forestry, hunting and fi shery in generating gross added value of the analyzed cross border region is falling systematically, in 2010 it was still at a relatively high level of 10.1%. This sector had the biggest relevance in the economy of the Volyn Oblast (16.9%) and the Brest Oblast (15.4%), the share of agriculture, forestry and fi shery is much smaller in generating gross added value of the Lubelskie Voivode- ship (7.4%) and the Lviv Oblast (9.6%).

28 29 Oblast was generated in the widely understood agricultural activity. Although, it Fig. 2.4 Structure of generating gross added value in 2010 (in %). was also lower than the national average, it markedly exceeded the value of the analyzed indicator in the services sector. This results from the speciﬁ city of the Belarusian agriculture, which is largely made up of big collective farms, operating on market principles but receiving subsidies from the state. Gross added value per 1 inhabitant working in industry, which constituted half of the national value, largely contributed to the level of work efﬁ ciency lower than national average in both oblasts located in the Ukrainian part of the analyzed cross border area.

Foreign trade is an important element of business activity. International trade may, in this context, serve as both the relatively easily measurable endogenous potential of the analyzed territorial units as well as the measure of their functional links with other states. International trade in the Polish-Ukrainian-Belarusian border was characterized by a growing tendency between 2003-2011. Foreign trade in the Lubelskie Voivodeship increased two-and-a-half-fold from 1577.5 to 3787.3 million euro, twofold in the Brest Oblast from 1202.5 to 2784 million euro, and two- fold in the Volyn Oblast (from 606.5 to 1217.8 million Euro). The increase in Lviv Oblast was marginal (from 3075.4 to 3143.9 million Euro) due to the high import reference base effect in 2003.

Fig. 2.5.Work efﬁ ciency according to the economic sectors in 2010.

Structure of generating gross added value in the analyzed regions was a little bit different than in the countries of reference (fi g. 2.4). In the case of each of the discussed administrative units the agricultural sector had much bigger relevance: its share in generating gross added value of the Volyn Oblast was over twice as high as in the Ukraine, in the Lubelskie Voivodeship it was twice as big as in Poland and in the Brest Oblast it exceeded 5.3 percentage points of Belarus’s share in generating gross added value. Simultaneously, each of the analyzed territorial units was characterized by a signifi cantly smaller relevance of the industry as compared to the country of reference. This disproportion is especially visible in the case of the Volyn Oblast and the Lviv Oblast, in the case of which the share of industry in generating region’s gross added value was low- Foreign trade is an important element er by 12 and 10.2 percentage points of business activity. International from the national level. Source:Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the trade may, in this context, serve as The analyzed regions were char- Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce in the Volyn Oblast. acterized by lower labor effi ciency Offi cial exchange rate of national currencies in relation to euro according to the European Commission, (http://ec.europa.eu/budget/contracts _grants/info_contracts/inforeuro /inforeuro_en.cfm (accessed: both the relatively easily measurable in relation to national values, which 22 August 2013). further exacerbates the unfavorable endogenous potential of the analyzed structure of generating gross added territorial units as well as the measure value 2.5). The gross added value per 1 working person in the Lubelsk- of their functional links with other states. ie Voivodeship in 2010 amounted to Despite the fact that the value of foreign trade of the analyzed territorial units 14.9 thousand euro, which constitut- in the recent years was growing systematically, ich their share in the regional ed around 70% of national average structure of trade remains low and disproportionate not only to the demograph- and ranked it at the last place from among all the voivodeships in Poland. The ic potential but also to economic potential, measured by the GDP share of ana- situation in agriculture had an especially negative infl uence on such a state of lyzed regions in the GDP of particular countries of reference. In 2011 Lubelskie affairs. Taking into consideration its semi-subsistence character and signifi cant Voivodeship had only a 1.6% share in Polish export and 1.1% share in Polish share in the labor structure of the Voivodeship (38.3%), the gross added value per import. The share of the Brest Oblast in Belarus’s export amounted to 6.3%, while 1 working person in this sector was almost twice as low as the national average. import amounted to 4.6%. The share of the Lviv and Volyn Oblasts in the Ukrainian Work effi ciency was markedly diverging from the national average in the remain- foreign trade amounts to around 1.7% and 0.9% in the case of export and 3.9% ing administrative units included in the diagnosis. In the case of the Brest Oblast and 1.3% respectively in the case of import. This is an evidence of the relative- it was 84.8% of the national average, Lviv Oblast – 74.1%, while the Volyn Oblast ly low level of international economic links of the analyzed cross border region, – 65.7%. A relatively high level of gross added value per 1 inhabitant in the Brest which illustrates its peripheral nature and low competitiveness.

30 31 od Lubelskie Voivodeship reported a signiﬁ cantly positive foreign trade balance. This also regards the trade balance of the Lubelskie Voivodeship with Ukraine and Table. 2.2. Foreign trade (in million euro). Belarus. In the case of the Brest Oblast trade exchange was relatively balanced, while the Lviv Oblast and Volyn Oblast were characterized by a marked foreign Item 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 trade deﬁ cit.

Lubelskie Voivodeship: Border trade (table 2.3) has a big infl uence on the economic condition of the analyzed cross border export 974,2 1026,0 no data 1406,4 1614,3 1812,5 1403,0 1726,0 2141,7 region. It plays a particularly relevant role in the case of the import 603,3 596,0 no data 871,3 1133,2 1488,0 1011,0 1290,5 1645,6 Lubelskie Voivodeship, which attracts over half of the gener- Border trade has a big infl uence on the balance 370,9 430,0 no data 535,1 481,1 324,5 392,0 435,5 496,1 al expenses born by foreign- economic condition of the analyzed cross Brest Oblast: ers on the territory of Eastern Poland (44.5% in 2012). Pur- border region. export 603,5 729,0 786,3 905,0 960,1 1105,9 883,3 1193,8 1396,6 chase of goods was the main purpose of visit for 79.8% of import 598,5 671,0 671,0 841,2 856,1 1130,2 924,7 1214,8 1387,3 persons entering Lubelskie balance 5,0 58,0 115,3 63,8 104,0 -24,3 -41,5 -21,0 9,3 Voivodeship from the eastern border. Amounts spent by foreigners on the territory of the Lubelskie Voivideship between 2009-2012 systematically grew, reaching Lviv Oblast: the value of 2.9 billion złotych. Introduction of local border traffi c encompassing the citizens of the Polish-Ukrainian border area (up to 30km) was defi nitely condu- export 440,7 512,3 496,3 645,1 759,3 673,4 570,4 732,9 858,0 cive. The subsequent simplifi cation of Polish-Ukrainian border crossing procedure import 2634,7 911,5 744,8 896,8 1079,3 1734,9 1165,6 1525,8 2285,9 markedly infl uenced the mobility in the border-belt area, thus boosting amounts spent by foreigners. balance -2194,1 -399,2 -248,5 -251,7 -320,0 -1061,5 -595,2 -792,9 -1428,0

Volyn Oblast:

export 183,2 220,9 224,0 269,6 309,4 313,6 229,2 327,1 461,4 Table 2.3.Spending by foreigners in Poland and Poles abroad on the external border of the Lubelskie import 423,3 536,5 531,4 523,7 773,1 881,9 307,3 429,9 756,4 Voivodeship (in million PLN).

balance -240,0 -315,6 -307,3 -254,1 -463,7 -568,3 -78,1 -102,8 -295,0 Foreigners Poles List Source:Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the 2009 2010 2011 2012 2009 2010 2011 2012 Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce of the Volyn Oblast. Data for the Lubelskie Voivodeship K. Gawlikowska-Hueckel, S. Umiński, Handel zagraniczny Total spending 1 008,0 1 867,0 2 107,9 2 879,3 202,4 237,9 211,0 205,1 województwa lubelskiego, (Foreign trade of the Lubelskie Voivodeship [in:] P. Ciżkowicz, P. Opala (red.), Uwarunkowania krajowej i międzynarodowej konkurencyjności województwa lubelskiego Total goods pur- 991,3 1 843,4 2 076,1 2 827,8 195,5 228,1 204,8 197,4 (National and international specifi city of competitiveness of the Lubelskie Voivodeship), Warszawa chases 2011; Handel zagraniczny w Polsce i Małopolsce w 2011 r (Foreign trade in Poland and Małopolska in 2011), Małopolskie Obserwatorium Gospodarki, Kraków 2012. including: food prod- 160,1 248,0 242,0 336,9 38,4 32,2 25,1 20,7 ucts non-food products 831,2 1 595,4 1 834,1 2 490,9 122,9 160,3 149,3 147,7 In the course of the last two decades a clear re-orientation of the Polish econ- Remaining 16,7 23,6 31,8 51,5 7,0 9,8 6,2 7,7 omy took place in the scope of trade relations. Germany became Poland’s most expenditure important trade partner along with other European Union member states, while export ties with eastern neighbors were, on the other hand, loosened. Despite Source: Own work on the basis of data of Main Statistical Offi ce. that fact, trade with Ukraine and Belarus still plays an important role in the trade structure of the Lubelskie Voivodeship. Lubelskie Voivodeship is primarily a place of relatively strong concentration of export into Ukraine, although its relevance is systematically decreasing13. In 2008 the share of Ukraine in the geographic structure of export from the Lubelskie Voivodeship amounted to 10.3% (towards The purchase of goods was also the most important reason of visit for 81.4% 2.5% in the export structure for Poland in general) which ranked it 2nd from among of Poles crossing the border of the Lubelskie Voivodeship with Belarus and the most important recipients. The share of Belarus in the export of goods from Ukraine. Spending of Poles abroad was, however, a dozen times lower than the the Lubelskie Voivodeship amounted to 3.0%, which ranked the country 11th from spending of foreigners on the territory of Poland. Therefore, in 2012 the border among the most important export channels. Trade with Poland is especially rele- trade balance in the Lubelskie Voivodeship was very benefi cial for the Polish vant in the trade structure of the Lviv Oblast. In 2011 the share of Poland in import side and amounted to almost 2.7 billion PLN. to that region amounted to 20.2% while the share of export – 19.1%. The share of Poland in the geographic import structure of the Brest Oblast (15.7%) and the share of Poland and Belarus in the geographic import structure of the Volyn Oblast (12.6% and 10.1% respectively) was quite substantial. In the entire analyzed peri-

3 T. Komornicki, Handel, [in:] W. Janicki (red.), Lubelskie Voivodeship. Środowisko – społe- czeństwo – gospodarka (Environment – society – economy), Lublin 2011, page 153.

32 33 Fig. 2.6. Foreign Direct Investment (in million euro). In order to attract foreign capital into the analyzed area several Special Economic Zones (SEZ) were created. Their basic goal is to attract investment and accelerate economic development through the development of speciﬁ c the areas of economic activity, creating new jobs, activating post-industrial property and increasing the competitiveness of products and services.

In the case of Special Economic Zones created in Poland, investors were exempted from income tax owing to their investments and generated jobs. The preferential conditions of conducting business activities include also real estate tax exemptions and professional legal help in arranging necessary formal- ities related to initiating activity in SEZ. Maximal amount of the granted regional Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce of the Volyn Oblast. Data for the Lubelskie aid was dependant on such factors as: investment location, investment amount Voivodeship: estimate of GDP per capita and foreign direct investment in voivodeships as well as leading indicators or costs related to the employment of new workers and the size of the enter- describing the economic situation. Expert evaluation study performed at the request of the Ministry of Regional prise seeking the tax exemption. Additionally, the allowed value of regional aid Development, BIEC, Warszawa 2011. Offi cial exchange rate of national currencies in relation to euro according to the EuropeanCommission,(http://ec.europa.eu/budget/contracts_grants/info_contracts/inforeuro/inforeuro_en.cfm was set out by the Regional Aid Map, which specifi es the percentage share of (accessed: 22 August 2013).. the aid in the costs that qualify for this aid. Special Economic Zones in Poland will function until 2026. Lubelskie Voivodeship is not a direct host to any of the 14 Special Economic Zones existing in Poland, there are, however, three sub- zones of the following Special Economic Zones: Special Economic Zone EU- RO-PARK Mielec, SEZ „Starachowice” and TSSE EURO-PARK Wisłosan. The One of the main barriers for the economic development on the analyzed cross sub-zones of the SEZ Euro-Park Mielec in the Lubelskie Voivodeship are locat- border area is the lack of capital; therefore the infl ow of foreign investment is of ed in Lublin (118 ha), Lubartów (20 ha), Zamość (54 ha) and Radzyń Podlaski paramount importance (fi g. 2.6). The infl ow of foreign direct investment to (fully developed area of about 2 ha). TSSE Euro-Park hosts the following sub- the analyzed cross border area amounted to 188.8 million euro in the case of zones: Janów Lubelski (18.51 ha), Łuków (27.29 ha), Tomaszów Lubelski (10.56 the Lviv Oblast, 132.8 million euro in the case of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, 46.1 ha), Kraśnik (23.48 ha), Horodło (5.30 ha), Ryki (4.45 ha), and Poniatowa (2 ha) million euro in the case of the Brest Oblast and 43.6 million euro in the Volyn Additionally, Sub-zone Radom encompasses Sub-zone Puławy (99.63 ha) which Oblast. The cumulated infl ow of direct investment to the analyzed cross border operates within SEZ Starachowice. In the biggest sub-zone located on the ter- area between 2007 and 2010 amounted to 1 644.7 million euro, with the biggest ritory Lubelskie Voivodeship – Lublin SEZ EURO-PARK Mielec, permission to benefi ciary of the FDI being the Lviv Oblast. Its share in the total infl ow of FDI to conduct business activity was granted to 23 entities which declared an investment the analyzed area amounted to 45.9%. The share of the Lubelskie Voivodeship of 160 million euro and generation of 1.2 thousand new jobsy4. The joint area of (ranked second) amounted to 32.3% while the Brest and Volyn Oblasts – 11.2% all SEZs in the Lubelskie Voivodeship covers no more than 2% of the SEZ area in and 10.6% respectively. It needs to be emphasized however, that the infl ow of Poland. This means that this factor infl uencing the attractiveness of the Lubelskie foreign direct investment to the above mentioned territorial units in relation to the Voivodeship is, to a large extent, unexplored and underdeveloped5. national values was marginal, which refl ects, fi rst of all, low attractiveness of the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian borderland. Lviv Oblast’s share in the infl ow The Brest Oblast is a host to the Brest Free Economic Zone, which is one of of FDI into Ukraine between 2007 and 2010 amounted to 3.4%, the Brest Oblast’s six free economic zones (FEZ) operating on the territory of Belarus (right next to share in FDI infl ow into Belarus – 1.8%, Lubelskie Voivodeship’s share in the in- FEZ Mińsk, FEZ Hornel-Raton, FEZ Witebsk, FEZ Mohylew and FEZ Grodnoin- fl ow of FDI into Poland – 1.2%, while the share of the Volyn Oblast in the infl ow of west). According to the Belarusian law, Free Economic Zones are part of the terri- FDI into Ukraine amounted merely to 0.8%. tory of the Republic of Belarus, that have strictly established borders and special legal status that offers benefi cial conditions for conducting business activity. Ben- efi ciaries of Free Economic Zones are legal persons or natural persons conducting business activity included and specifi ed in the legal provisions binding in Free Economic Zones. Their attractiveness results fi rst of all from the tax exemptions i.e. income tax exemptions, exemptions regarding customs duties and VAT as well as stability of the legal framework. Belarusian Free Economic Zones have own detailed goals and tasks and can also offer additional, benefi cial investment con-

4 Data as at: http://lublin.eu/Specjalna_Strefa_Ekonomiczna-1-298-3-347.html (accessed: 26 August 2013). 5 P. Opala, B. Osieka, Atrakcyjność inwestycyjna województwa lubelskiego,(Investment attractiveness of the Lubelskie Voivodeship [in:] P. Ciżkowicz, P. Opala (ed.), op. cit., Warszawa 2011, page 133-134.

34 35 ditions both to foreign as well as national investors. Free Economic Zones in Bela- rus will operate until 2017. Free Economic Zone Brest offers beneﬁ cial framework Table. 2.4. Position of Poland, Belarus and Ukraine in the „Doing Business 2013” Ranking. conditions for companies that include a 5 year, 100% proﬁ t tax exemption, custom free import of devices and resources no receipt and licenses on own-produced export goods and 40% lower tax in comparison to non – resident companies. In Category Poland Belarus Ukraine 2013, 88 entrepreneurs from 20 countries were active in the Special Economic General simplicity of conducting business Zone Brest, (mainly Germany, Poland and Russia), the joint value of foreign di- 55 58 137 rect investment amounted to 660 million euro, while the number of created jobs activity 6 exceeded 26 thousand . Registration of ownership 62 3 149

Between 1996 and 2000, 12 Special Economic Zones were created in the Setting up business activity 124 9 50 Ukraine, two of which were located in the analyzed cross border area: „Jaworów” and „Kurortopolis Truskawiec” in the Lviv Oblast. Additionally, 9 of the so-called Ensuring the execution of contracts 56 13 42 Priority Development Areas were created with one of them located on the territory Obtainig building permits 161 30 183 of the Volyn Oblast (the City of Nowowołyńsk and Żowtnewe residential estate). The allocated exemptions regarded, fi rst of all, income tax, exemptions in land Liquidation of enteprises 37 56 157 fees granted for the development period, exemptions from customs duties and VAT for goods (apart from excise goods, food and agricultural products) import- Protection of investor’s rights 49 82 117 ed for production purposes as well as excluding those goods from quotas and Credit availability 4 104 23 licensing (except for those provided for in international agreements). Particularly dynamic development was observed in the SEZ „Jaworów”, which is the leader in Taxation 114 129 165 attracting foreign investment, including numerous Polish investments. SSE „Inter- Foreign trade 50 151 145 port Kowel” was in a far worse situation, since it did not really Availability of electric energy 137 171 166 commence its activity. Special Economic Zones in the Ukraine Source: Own work on the basis of the World Bank data, http://www.worldbank.org (accessed: 5 August 2013). Economic situation of the analyzed were liquidated as of 31 March, 2005. In 2012, The Verkhovna cross border area is largely dependent Rada of Ukraine adapted an act on industrial practices, which on the conditions of conducting business are supposed to stimulate the Economic situation of the analyzed cross border area is largely dependent on activity economic development by at- the conditions of conducting business activity. According to the statistics of the tracting investment, including World Bank published in the „Doing Business 2013” report that measured the gen- foreign investment. The act pro- eral simplicity of conducting business activity in 2012, Poland was ranked 55th, vides for specifi c exemptions Belarus 58th and Ukraine 137th, from among 185 analyzed states (table 2.4). and preferences for investors The Doing Business ranking has infl uence on decisions taken by „big business”, including, among other things: the possibility to grant fi nancial support for the initi- it has a bearing on the public debt rating as well as the price of bonds issued by ator of a given industrial park in the form of interest-free loans, excise-free export big private entities. It also has an infl uence on how foreign direct investment fl ows of goods (except for excise goods) devoted for equipping and arranging a given into the country8.Poland scored high for the availability of credit, while Belarus industrial park as well as excise-free export of goods used for this activity (except was highly evaluated for the ease of setting up business activity. Poland’s overall for the excise goods, the counterparts of which are manufactured in the Ukraine)7. relatively distant place in that ranking is related primarily to the diffi culties related to obtaining building permits, diffi culties related to initiating business activity and complicated tax system. In the case of Belarus, a major obstacle in conducting business activity are the complicated foreign trade procedures, complicated tax system and limited access to credit. While in the case of Ukraine, freedom of conducting business activity is limited by diffi culties in obtaining construction permits, complicated tax system, diffi culties in registering ownership, complicated foreign trade procedures and weak protection of investors’ rights.

Poland, Belarus and Ukraine are among the leader states, in which the conditions of running business activity were greatly improved in comparison to 2005. In this classiﬁ cation Belarus was ranked 3rd from among all states included in the Ranking (increase of 23.5 percentage points), Poland – 17 (increase of 12.3 percentage points), while Ukraine was ranked 20th (increase of 12.0 percentage points.) 9. Ukraine has obtained higher ranking in the course of the last two years

8 In the „Doing Business 2013” ranking, the World Bank evaluated 10 areas that regulate business activity i.e. setting up a company, building permits, access to electricity, registration of ownership, obtaining credit, protection of investors, paying taxes, foreign trade, enforcement of contracts and liquidation procedures. Evaluating each regulatory areas, the World Bank took under consideration how time consuming and costly the procedures are. 6 Data as per Free Economic Zone Brest, http://www.fez.brest.by/en/sez-brest/sez-segod- 9 Doing Business 2013. Smarter Regulations for Small and Medium-Size Enterprises. Comparing nya (accessed: 26 August 2013). Business Regulations for Domestic Firms in 185 Economies. 10th Edition, The World Bank, Wash- 7 Закон України «Про індустріальні парки», Верховна Рада України, Закон від ington 2013, s. 9, http://www.doingbusiness.org/~/media/GIAWB/Doing %20Business/Documents/ 21.06.2012, № 5018-VI. Annual-Reports/English/DB13-full-report.pdf (accessed: 1 September 2013.).

36 37 (2011-2012) owing to the improvement of conditions for conducting business activity and the registration of ownership, as well as the sweeping reform of the tax system. According to the results of the „Doing Business 2013” ranking, Ukraine, at present, belongs to the group of countries with the fastest rate of reforming business activity.

 Both Polish as well as the Belarusian and Ukrainian part of the analyzed cross border area belong to economically weakly developed regions. The GDP value per 1 inhabitant expressed according to the purchasing price parity is several times lower than the European region average (over two times lower than in the Lubelskie Voivodeship, three times lower than in the Brest Oblast, almost seven times lower in the Lviv Oblast and over eight times lower than in the case of the Volyn Oblast) ranking the analyzed regions on distant places among European regions (from 302 to 343 from among 348 of statistical units on the NUTS2 level included by the comparison). Moreover, the analyzed territorial units belong to the weakest economically developed in particular countries of reference. 2.2  The negative phenomenon characterizing the status of the economy of the 2. analyzed macroregion is the divergence of the level of economic development in relation to countries in question and the European average. This regards all CROSS BORDER analyzed regions, apart from the Volyn Oblast the developmental dynamics of which in the recent years has been changeable. This situation will certainly be diffi cult to overcome in the foreseeable future considering the unfavorable structure of the economy, characterized by a relatively signifi cant share of COOPERATION POTENTIAL low-effi ciency agriculture in generating gross added value and a relatively low share of the services and industrial sector that usually generated high added value.

 Despite the fact that the value of foreign trade of the analyzed territorial unit in the recent years was growing systematically, their share in the regional structure of trade remains low and disproportionate not only to the demographic potential but also to economic potential, measured by the share of analyzed COLOGICAL POTENTIAL regions in GBP of particular countries of reference. This means that the Pol- E ish-Belarusian-Ukrainian border is characterized by low endogenous potential and weak functional links with other countries.

 The inﬂ ow of foreign direct investments to the analyzed regions remained at a low level in relation to national values. Their share in the inﬂ ow of FDI to particular countries was at the level ranging from 0.8% in the case of the Volyn Oblast to 3.4% in the case of the Lviv Oblast. This makes the border area un- attractive from an investment perspective.

 The improvement of conditions for conducting business activity in Poland, Be- larus and Ukraine observed in the recent years has a positive inﬂ uence on the shaping of the economic potential of the macroregion. It also encourages investments by external capital in the form of special economic zones (Polish part), free economic zones (Belarusian part) and industrial parks (Ukrainian part).

The area of the analyzed cross border region is characterized by a relatively low level of industrially degraded lands, therefore ecosystems developed here characterized by high environmental bio-diversity, with rare types of plants and animals.

38 39 Table 2.6. More relevant legally protected areas in the Brest, Lviv and Volyn Oblasts.

Brest Oblast Lviv Oblast Volyn Oblast 2.2.2 Areas area area area number (thousand number (thousand number (thousand The most precious elements of the natural environment of the Polish, ha) ha) ha) Ukrainian and Belarusian territory were taken under different forms of le- Of national signiﬁ cance gal protection. The percentage of legally protected areas being part of the cross border region in 2011 was highest in the Lubelskie Voivodeship and "Roztocze" nature - - 1 2,1 - - amounted to 22.7%, in the case of the Brest Oblast it included 13.9% of the reserve total area, while in the Volyn and Lviv Oblasts it was markedly lower and Czeremski nature - - - - 1 3,0 amounted to 4.5% and 6.8% respectively. reserve national parks 1 125,0 3 58,4 3 121,8

nature reserves 19 131,2 9 3,3 15 7,7

Table 2.5.More relevant legally protected areas in the Lubelskie Voivodeship. natural monuments 35 - 2 0,6 3 0,1

Of local signiﬁ cance: Lubelskie Voivodeship Areas regional landscape - - 4 47,4 - - number area (thousand ha) parks nature reserves 31 27,7 34 27,6 205 89,3 National parks 2 18,2 natural monuments 24 - 164 1,8 120 0,5 Nature reserves 86 11,9

Landscape parks 17 233,2 Source: Ministry of Environmental Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Belarus, Protected nature parks 17 299,2 Department of Ecology and Environmental Resources of Lviv Oblast and National Environmental Protection Board in Volyn Oblast. Natural monuments 1513 -

Source: Statistical Offi ce in Lublin. In the Lviv Oblast there are 347 protected sites with environmental and landscape values covering the surface of 148.6 thousand ha (table 2.6). Their bigger part includes areas with local signifi cance (322) while 25 were qualifi ed as object The system of protected areas in the Lubelskie Voivodeship consists of 2 na- with national signifi cance. Due to the possibility to develop cross border coop- tional parks, 86 nature reserves, 17 landscape parks, 17 protected nature parks, eration the most important protected area seems to be the one located to the with dominant single trees and tree groups (table 2.5). The Lubelskie area from the north-west of Lviv, including, fi rst of all, Jaworowski Park Narodowy, as well as moment of Polish Entry into the European Union is part of the ecological Natura „Roztocze” natural reserve and several monuments of nature all of which, along 2000 network created in order to protect and maintain the environmental habitats with sites on the Polish side, constitute part of the „Roztocze” Cross Border Pro- and species important for the European Community. Protected areas are located tected Area. mainly in the eastern and southern parts of the region guaranteeing, thanks to the border proximity, benefi cial conditions to create cross border networks of environmental protection. In the eastern part of Lubelskie region close to the border with Ukraine and Belarus there is a big complex of protected areas which includes among other things: Polesie National Park, Chełm and Polesie Protected Nature Park and the Chełmski and Sobiborski Landscape Park. South of Zam- ość one can distinguish between a concise environmentally protected area which includes Roztoczański National Park and three landscape parks: Krasnobrodzki, Szczebrzeszyński and „Solska Forest”. A relevant element of the region’s protected area system is the wood complex located in the south-west part that includes „Lasy Janowskie” Landscape Park and Kraśinicki and Roztoczański Protected Nature Park.

In the Brest Oblast there are 110 protected areas and sites (table 2.6). This includes 1 national park, 19 nature reserves with national signiﬁ cance and 31 of local relevance. The environmentally most precious area is the Białowieska For- est, located both on the Belarusian as well as Polish side, which was entered onto the UNESCO’s world heritage list as the biggest forest-covered area in Europe In order to develop friendly cross border cooperation between the neighboring areas the Białowieska Forest Euroregion has been created grouping the border self-government authorities of the poviat and municipal level of the Podlawskie Voivodeship and three border regions on the Belarusian side.

40 41 Cumańska” National Park are located on the Ukrainian side in the Volyn Oblast. Fig. 2.7. Forms of environmental protection The Jaworski National Park, „Północne Podole” National Park and the „Beskidy Sokolskie” National Park are located in the Lviv Oblast. From among the 9 national parks located on the examined cross border area, the „Puszcza Białowieska” National Park has the biggest surface of over The most comprehensive environmental 1.5 thousand. km2. Parks located protection is ensured by national parks, in the Volyn Oblast have a slightly smaller area (around 1.2 thousand which protect nature and landscape values km2) and in the Lviv Oblast (around in a given area. 580 km2), while the National Parks in the Lubelskie Voivodeship have the smallest surface of the protected area (around 180 km2).

The international cooperation developing in the scope of environmental and landscape protection offered the possibility of creating a system of protected cross border regions on the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian Border. One of the elements of this system is the International Biosphere Reserve network, which fulﬁ lls an important role from the point of view of planning and regional policy based on ecologically balanced development. The sites being part of this network are also part of the UNESCO „Human and Biosphere” programme and they fulﬁ ll the environmental and landscape protection function conducive to a balanced economic development, promoting ecological education, training and monitoring of local regional, national and global issues related to environmental protection and sustain- able development. The List of International Biosphere Reserves currently includes 598 areas, 11 of which are located in Poland. From among the Polish biosphere reserves 4 are of cross border character: Karkonosze, Karpaty Zachodnie, Tatry and Polesie Zachodnie.

The Cross Border „Polesie Zachodnie” Biosphere Reserve, was created on the analyzed cross border area in 2012. It encompasses Analyzing the spatial development of air the territory in Poland, Belarus and Ukraine, which, until now, constitut- pollution on the analyzed area it should be ed part of the (national) biosphere re- observed that it concentrates mainly close serves. On the Polish side this area includes the „Polesie Zachodnie” to the national borders of Poland Ukraine Biosphere Reserve with the area of Source: Own work on the basis of Map 2. Protection of the environmental-landscape values in Lubelskie and Belarus. Voivodeship, [in:] Strategia rozwoju województwa lubelskiego na lata 2014-2020 (Development Strategy around: 140 thousand ha, includ- of the Lubelskie Voivodeship for 2014-2020 (until 2030), page.14, prepared by Ofﬁ ce for Spatial ing the Poleski National Park, land- and Regional Planning in Lublin Екологiчний атлас Львiвщини, ред. Б. М. Матолич, Державне scape parks – Sobiborski, Poleski, управління охорони навколишнього природного середовища в Львівській області, Львiв 2007, page. 26; Internet website of the Ministry of Environmental Resources and environmental protection of Łęczyński Lake District, Chełmski the Republic of Belarus http://www.minpriroda.gov.by /ru/osob_ohran (accessed 2 August, 2013) and (fragment), as well as big complexes of Parczewskie and Włodawskie forests. the data of the National Environmental Protection Board in the Volyn Oblast. On the Belarusian side, the „Nadbużańskie Polesie” Biosphere Reserve covers an area of over 48 thousand ha. Its most precious part is made up of the „Polesie Nadbużańskie” Biosphere Reserve. The reserve includes mainly forest complexes (almost all types of forests located in Belarus), Bug river valley as well as water reservoirs of natural and artiﬁ cial origin. The Cross Border Biosphere Reserve On the territory of the Volyn Oblast there are 384 protected sites including 26 includes also the Ukrainian Szacki Biosphere Reserve, with an area of around 75 of national importance with the total area of 234.8 thousand ha (table 2.6). Szacki thousand ha. Its borders encompass the Szacki National Park with the complex National Park, located in the western part of the Oblast, is part of the Ukrainian of the biggest lakes in the Ukraine, including the Świtaź lake (around 2600 ha), section of „Polesie Zachodnie” International Biosphere Reserve. The area with peat bogs, spring of the Prypeć river as well as a small part of the Bug river valley. decently preserved environmental values is a vast western part of the region with Another such site, still at the planning stage, is the „Roztocze” Cross Border Bio- the National Park „Cumańska Forest”, Czremski Nature Reserve as well as Na- sphere Reserve. It stretches from the Batorz town in the Lubelskie Voivodeship tional Park „Prypeć-Stochód” near the Ukrainian-Belarusian border. until Lviv. On the territory of Poland it includes the Roztoczański National Park as well as landscape parks: Szczebrzeszyński, Solska Forest, Krasnobrodzki and The most comprehensive environmental protection is ensured by national Południoworoztoczański, while on the Ukrainian side Jaworowski National Park parks, which protect nature and landscape values in a given area. On the Pol- and the vast „Roztocze” nature reserve. It is characterized by impressive natural ish side, there are two national parks Poleski and Roztoczański. The „Puszcza and landscape values and its Polish fragment covers the physiogeographic me- Białowieska” National Park is located in the Brest Oblast. Szacki National Park, soregion of Roztocze. The planned „Przełom Bugu” Cross Border Protected Area Prypeć-Stochód National Park as well as the youngest (created in 2010) „Puszcza is located on the Polish-Belarusian border and includes part of the Bug river valley

42 43 and the valley areas between Brest and Drohincz, on the Polish side it is located mostly in the Podlaskie Voivodeship, while in the Lubelskie Voivodehip it includes the „Podlaski Przełom Bugu” Landscape Park. Analyzing the spatial development of air pollution Economic activity and attempts to improve the living conditions contribute to degeneration of natural environment. The biggest environmental damage is re- on the analyzed area (ﬁ g. 2.9) it should be observed lated to air, water and soil pollution. Air pollution is understood as introduction of solid, liquid or gaseous substances into the air by humans in such amounts, which that it concentrates mainly close to the national may endanger human health and negatively inﬂ uence the climate, wildlife, soil or borders of Poland Ukraine and Belarus. water.

High level of pollution was reported in the western part of the Brest Oblast Emission of pollution into the atmospheric aira Table. 2.7. (Brest, Kamieniec and Żabinec regions). In the central part of the analyzed cross border region, the highest air pollution emission level was reported in poviats lo- List 2005 2008 2009 2010 2011 cated in the middle part of the Lubelskie Voivodeship: in particular in the Chełm Poviat with the city of Chełm, Łęczyca Poviat and the city of Lublin. One should in thousand t also point out numerous wonders of wildlife and nature, like the Poleski National Lubelskie Voivodeship 42,5 36,4 36,0 35,8 36,3 Park, located on the territory of the abovementioned poviats. Sokal and Czer- wonygród areas located in the Lviv Oblast with the neighboring poviats of Hru- Brest Oblast 31,2 26,4 34,3 28,6 27,1 bieszew and Tomaszów in the Lubelskie Voivodeship reported particularly high air pollution levels. Lviv Oblast 95,8 126,4 121,0 113,2 129,4

Volyn Oblast 10,1 10,0 7,6 8,2 7,6 Other factors infl uencing environmental degradation include water and soil pollution due to sewage generated by plants and other facilities as well as per 1 km2 in t households. It is worth emphasizing that the analyzed area was characterized by a relatively insignifi cant number of disposed sewage in relation to the na- Lubelskie Voivodeship 1,7 1,4 1,4 1,4 1,4 tional amounts. The percentage of waste generated in the Lubelskie Voivodeship amounts to less than 2% of all sewage disposed in Poland, while analogous in- Brest Oblast 1,0 0,8 1,0 0,9 0,8 dicators for the Lviv and Volyn Oblasts amounted to 3% and 0.6% respectively. Lviv Oblast 4,4 5,8 5,5 5,2 5,9 On the examined cross border area the total number of disposed sewage in 2011 amounted to 488 mln m3, i.e. by 2% less than in 2003. In the span of the last 9 Volyn Oblast 0,5 0,5 0,4 0,4 0,4 years relevant changes have been observed as to the amounts of disposed sew- a Industrial, dust and gaseous without carbon dioxide. age. Lubelskie Voivodeship and Volyn Oblast witnessed an increase in the num- Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the ber of generated sewage (by 36.6% and 27.4% respectively), while Brest and Lviv Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce of the Volyn Oblast. Obalsts reported a decrease (14.3% and 18.7% respectively). In consequence the share of the Lviv Oblast in the disposed waste decreased by 8.7 percentage points to the level of 42.5% and Brest Oblast by 2.4 percentage points and amounted to 16.5%. The percentage of waste disposed from the area of the Lubelskie Voivode- ship amounted to 31.9% and increased by 9 percentage points, while the smallest In the analyzed cross border region the level of dust and gaseous atmos- amount of sewage was disposed from the area of the Volyn Oblast (9.1%). pheric air pollution in 2011 (without carbon dioxide) amounted to slightly over 200 thousand t. About 64% of that amount came from industrial facilities operating on One of the most important elements contributing to the improvement of the the territory of the Lviv Oblast, 18% from the Lubelskie Voivodeship, 14% from the environment is the investments in sewage infrastructure. The combined length Brest Oblast, while little less than 4% from the Volyn Oblast. of the sewage network on the analyzed area amounted almost to 8400 km and in comparison to 2003 increased by almost a third. Thanks to the possibility to In the 1990s of the XX century and in the beginning of the XXI century, Lubel- fi nance infrastructure investment from the EU funds, the biggest network increase skie Voivodeship witnessed a marked decrease of air pollutant emission caused was observed in the Lubelskie Voivodeship (by over 64%), while in the Ukraine by the decreased activity of industrial facilities, implementation of modern devices and Belarus the growth dynamics was far smaller and did not exceed 10%. Almost that decrease production intensity as well as increase of effectiveness of devices 60% of the length of the sewage system is located in the Lubelskie Voivodeship, reducing the level of pollution. During the last several years the level of emissions 23% in the Lviv Oblast and 11% in the Brest Oblast, while 8% in the Volyn Oblast. in the Lubelskie Voivodeship amounts to approximately 36 thousand t annually. In On average, the length of the sewage system per 100 km2 amounted to 8 km. An 2011 in the Volyn and Brest Oblasts there has been a marked decrease of pollu- almost two-times-higher result was reported in the Lubelskie Vovivodeship, with tion in relation to the average level from 2008-2010 (by 12% in the Volyn and 9% in Lviv Oblast recording average results and the Brest and Volyn Oblasts recording the Brest Oblast). A reversed tendency may be observed in the Lviv Oblast where much lower values. In comparison to 2003 the level of sewage system develop- the level of pollution in the same period amounted to 8%. The average level of pol- ment increased in the Lubelskie Voivodeship (by 7.6 km per 100 km2), while in the lution in the cross border area calculated per 1 km2 in 2011 amounted to around Ukrainian and Belarusian Oblasts it remained constant. 2 tonnes. Lviv Oblast signifi cantly exceeded this average with emissions almost three times higher, while the two remaining analyzed oblasts and the Lubelskie The analyzed cross border area is characterized by signifi cant environmental Voivodeship had a below average level of emission. values and a negligible level of environmental degradation. This is exemplifi ed by numerous protected areas of different importance, including 9 national parks, as well as numerous landscape parks and nature reserves. This is an area with ecosystems with stunning biodiversity including rich groupings of plants, rare and endangered species of animals as well as vast forests such as the Białowieska

44 45 Forest, Solska Forest and the Polesie area forest belt belonging to the „Green Lungs of Europe” stretching in the mid-eastern part of the Lubelskie Voivodeship along the Polish-Ukrainian border. The most environmentally precious areas are located on the Polish-Ukrainian, Polish-Belarusian and Belarusian-Ukrainian borders creating beneﬁ cial conditions for the development of cross border cooperation in the scope of environmental protection.

Fig. 2.9. Emission of industrial, dust, gaseous pollution into the air in 2011 . 2.2.3 CROSS BORDER COOPERATION POTENTIAL

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC POTENTIAL

The demographic potential is one of the basic determining factors behind the broadly understood socio-economic development.

46 47 2.2.3 Fig. 2.10. Population density The cross border (table 2.8) area analyzed in 2011 was inhabited by 7 142.8 thousand people, with 2540.9 thousand persons residing in the Lviv Oblast (i.e. 35.6%) in the Lubelskie Voivodeship – 2171.9 thousand persons (30.4%), Brest Oblast 1391.9 thousand persons (19.5%), while the Volyn Oblast – 1038.6 thousand persons (14.5%).

Table 2.8.Population in 2011 (in thousands)

Out of which: Population List urban rural in general men women population population Lubelskie Voivodeship 2 171,9 652,1 739,3 1 009,2 1 162,7

Brest Oblast 1 391,4 1 053,0 1 118,9 935,0 456,4

Lviv Oblast 2 540,9 1 193,0 1 329,6 1 544,9 996,0

Volyn Oblast 1 038,6 487,1 548,8 539,0 499,6

The population density indicator is an evidence of diverse population density distribution, 42 persons per 1 km2 in the Brest Oblast, 52 persons per km2 in the Volyn Oblast, 87 persons per km2 in the Lubelskie Voivodeship, 117 persons per km2 in the Lviv Oblast (with average for the analyzed area of around 73 persons per km2, fi g. 2.10). South-Western part of the Polish-Ukrainian-Belaru- sian border is characterized by much bigger population density than the relatively sparsely populated north-eastern part. From among all regions being part of the Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the analyzed cross border region only the population density in the Lviv Oblast ex- Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce of the Volyn Oblast. ceeds national average, which, in the case of Ukraine is at the level of 75 persons per 1 km2. In the case of the remaining territorial units it is lower or much lower than in the country of reference.

Brest Oblast has the highest urbanization indicator (67.2%), while in the case The biggest towns in the border area include Lviv – 786.6 thousand inhab- of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, village dweller population is slightly bigger (urban- itants, Lublin – 348.6 thousand, Brest - 320.9 thousand, Łuck – 210 thousand, ization indicator amounts to 46.5%). In the case of the Lviv Oblast and the Volyn Baranowicze – 169.9 thousand and Pińsk – 134.2 thousand. Additionally, on the Oblast the indicator values are 60.8% and 51.9% respectively. analyzed area, there are 9 other different cities with a population ranging from 50 to 100 thousand inhabitants (Drohobycz, Czerwonogród, Kowel, Chełm, Zamość, Biała Podlaska, Nowowołyńsk, Stryj and Kobryń).

48 49 The age structure of the population shows signs of gradual changes indi- Table 2.9.Demographic situation in 2011. cating falling population in the pre-productive age (0-14 years) and increase of population in productive age (15-64 years). They are a consequence of the longer life expectancy as well as changes in procreation patterns (including falling fertility Lubelskie Brest Lviv Volyn List rate) and migration outfl ow. Voivodeship Oblast Oblast Oblast Population density (persons 87 42 117 52 per 1 km2) Share of the urban 46,5 67,2 60,8 51,9 population in the general Table 2.10. Population as per economic age groups* (in %) number of inhabitants (in %) Share of the productive 14,6 14,0 14,3 12,9 age urban population in 2003 2011 the general number of List 65 and 65 and inhabitants (in %) 0-14 15-64 0-14 15-64 higher higher Marriages per 1000 5,6 8,8 7,5 7,5 Lubelskie Voivodeship 18.1 67.9 14.1 15.2 70.2 14.6 inhabitants Divorces per 1000 1,3 3,6 0,8 0,8 inhabitants Brest Oblast 18.0 67.5 14.5 16.8 69.2 14.0 Live births per 1000 9,8 12,7 11,4 14,1 inhabitants Lviv Oblast 17.3 68.2 14.5 15.6 70.1 14.3 Deaths per 1000 inhabitants 10,6 14,2 12,3 13,3 Natural increase rate per -0,7 -1,6 -0,9 0,7 Volyn Oblast 19.3 66.0 14.7 18.8 68.4 12.9 1000 inhabitants Life expectancy (in years) - 71,0 73,1 71,0 * According to the z International Labor Organization methodology. including: Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce of the Volyn Oblast. men 71,7 65,1 68,3 65,6 women 81,1 77,2 77,7 76,3

Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce of the Volyn Oblast. Negative changes in the age structure of the analyzed cross border macroregion is refl ected by the analysis of the demographic youth coeffi cient (fi g. 2.11), calculated as the share of productive age population in relation to the total population. On its basis, it is possible to specify the future demographic potential of a given area. The growth of its value indicates a tendency among the population The inhabitant network of the cross border region should be, however, to grow younger while a decreasing value informs about the future demographic specifi ed as relatively weak and sparse, which is especially characteristic in threats. Between 2003 and 2011 falling coeffi cient values were reported in all the case of the Brest Oblast and Volyn Oblast. Additionally, in each of the ana- analyzed territorial units. This predominantly regards the Lubelskie Voivodeship lyzed territorial units, the dominance of the regional capital is clearly visible in the (value of the coeffi cient decreased from the level of 22.1 to 17.9), this effect is least urban settlement network. Furthermore, in the proximity of the towns with higher visible in the Volyn Oblast (decrease from 23.9 to 23.1). A positive phenomenon and middle-range population in the south-western border area of the Polish-Bela- is the fact that the value of the demographic youth coeffi cient in particular regions rusian-Ukrainian region there is a tendency towards decreasing of the population exceeded the national level and – except for the Lubelskie Voivodeship – the EU number in the towns and increasing it around those towns. On the other hand, average. urban centers in the north-eastern part indicate a positive development tendency expressed by the number of inhabitants. The ageing process of the population of the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian border region is not confi rmed by the demographic burden indicator (fi g. 2.11), for Women make up more than half of the inhabitants of the analyzed cross bor- the purposes of this diagnosis the ratio was used of population in the post-produc- der area. The average feminization rate in 2011 amounted to 110, and it was far tive age to the population in the productive age. Between 2003 and 2011 the value bigger in the Brest and Volyn Oblast (in both regions there were 113 women per of the ratio decreased in all regions of the analyzed area, which was primarily 100 men) and in the Lviv Oblast (111) than in Lubelskie Voivodeship (106). The a consequence of the distinct increase of productive age population. It must be main cause of the existing disproportion in this scope is high male death rate in emphasized, however, that the demographic burden of post-productive age popu- Belarus and Ukraine. lation in the analyzed area is far smaller than the EU average.

In the analyzed cross border region there is a distinct variation in the average life expectancy according to particular territorial units. The highest value of this indicator was recorded in the Polish part of the analyzed area (71.7 years for men and 81.1 years for women). In the remaining regions life expectancy is lower in the case of the Brest Oblast and amounts to 65.1 years for men and 77.2 years form women, and in the case of the Lviv Oblast, 68.3 and 77.7 respectively, while in the case of the Volyn Oblast 65.6 and 76.3 years. 65,6 i 76,3 lat.

50 51 Fig. 2.11. Demographic youth and demographic burden coefﬁ cients in 2011. Fig. 2.12. Changes in the number of inhabitants in poviats and regions between 2003 and 2011

Although the analyzed area is inhabited by a substantial productive age population, in the coming years we shall observe a process of population cohorts shift- ing into the post-productive age. Currently, the problem of aging society is most visible in the eastern poviats of the Lubelskie Voivodeship. One must emphasize that the processes described above related to the aging population are characteristic for the entire Europe, and the demographic youth indicator analysis indicates that the situation on the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian border region is better than the average of the territory of EU member states.

The analyzed area of the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian border is showing signs of unfavorable demographic changes. Their direct effect is the falling number of inhabitants, which between 2003 and 2011 amounted to 145.7 thousand persons (ﬁ g. 2.12). This regards primarily the Lviv Oblast (decrease of 53.6 thousand persons) and the Brest Oblast (decrease of 44.5 thousand persons). Among the administrative units with growing population there are also poviats and regions located close to big urban centers, which is a consequence of suburban- ization processes.

52 53 Fig. 2.13. Natural growth rate per 1000 inhabitants Fig. 2.15. Natural growth rate and migration balance in 2011.

. Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce of the Volyn Oblast.

Fig. 2. 14. Migration balance (per 1000 inhabitants)

Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce of the Volyn Oblast. Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce in the Volyn Oblast.

Negative population growth rate and negative migration balance both have decisive infl uence on such a state of affairs (fi g. 2.14 and 2.15). In the The basic measure of human capital and professional qualifi cations is the Lubelskie Voivodeship both components of real growth rate between 2003-2011 population education level. The level of education among the citizens residing amounted to -0.6‰ and -2.3‰, in the Brest Oblast -2.5‰ and -1.5‰, in the Lviv in the analyzed area is high and, what is worth pointing out, there has been an Oblast -2.5‰ and -0.6‰, in the Volyn Oblast -1.2‰ and -0.5‰. This negative ten- almost two-fold increase in the number of persons with higher education in com- dency was broken in recent years only in the case of the Volyn Oblast for which the parison to the beginning of the XXI century10. The share of persons with higher ed- natural growth rate and the migration balance assumed positive values for the last ucation among the persons working in the Volyn Oblast amounted to 22.1%, while 3-4 years. The analyzed regions belong, therefore, primarily to outfl ow regions in the Lviv Oblast the number is 21.8%11. Share of persons with higher education in which is not compensated by natural growth rate (fi g. 2.13 and 2.15). the general population of the Brest Oblast in productive age (15-65 lat) amounted to 17.7%12, while in the Lubelskie Voivodeship to 16.2%13.

Number of employed persons on the analyzed area in 2011 amounted to 3183.6 thousand persons with 34.6% persons in Lviv Oblast, 31.4% – in Lubelskie 10 Data regarding the level of education come from the census performed around 2000 i.e. in 1999 in Belarus, 2001 in the Ukraine and 2002 in Poland. 11 Data from 2012 regard only employed persons. 12 Data coming from the census conducted in Belarus in 2009. 13 Data from the National Census conducted in 2011.

54 55 Voivodeship, 20.2% – in Brest Oblast, 13.8% – in Volyn Oblast. Number of pro- The average monthly gross remuneration in 2011 in the analyzed cross fessionally active persons in the general population aged above 15 was high- border region was at a level of around 180 euro in the Volyn Oblast, 203 euro in the est in the Brest Oblast (78.6%), and lowest in the Lubelskie Voivodeship (57.1%). LvivOblast, 246 euro in the Brest Oblast and 748 euro in the Lubelskie Voivode- While in the Lviv and Volyn Oblasts the numbers amounted to 63.1% and 64.3% ship. In each case it was lower than national averages. The worst situation in respectively. this category was observed in the Volyn Oblast, where the average monthly remuneration amounted to only 75.7% of the national average, with a relatively better situation reported in Lubelskie Voivodeship (90.1%). In the case of the remaining regions, i.e. Lviv Oblast and Brest Oblast, it amounted to 85.2% and 86.7% of the average national gross remuneration. In truth, the remuneration lower than The employed according to economic sectors in Fig. 2.16. national average on the analyzed cross border region translates into lower level of income and consumption expenditure of households, that results in lower costs 2011. of conducting business activity, which may, paradoxically, constitute a relevant argument towards attracting external investments.

An important premise of cross border links between Poland, Belarus and Ukraine is the infl ow of employees. Taking up employment is the main reason for arrival for 0.6% of persons who cross the Polish-Belarusian border and 1.7% of persons who cross the Polish-Ukrainian border, while undertaking employment on one’s own account or conducting business was the main reason for 2.4% of persons crossing the Polish-Belarusian border and 4.6% of persons crossing the Polish-Ukrainian border on the territory of the Lubelskie Voivodeship in 201215. The liberalization of regulations introduced in 2008 facilitated the process of hiring foreign nationals on the territory of Poland, which frees the citizens of Belarus and Ukraine from the necessity to seek work permit for work performed for the period Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the not exceeding 6 months during subsequent 12 months16. Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce of the Volyn Oblast.

Table 2.11. Declarations on the intention to employ a foreign national registered in Poviat Labor Offi ces Analyzing the structure of the employed according to economic sectors (fi g. 2.16) attention must be drawn to the relatively high percentage of those employed in the industry and construction in the Brest Oblast (33.7%) and agricultur- Declarations on the intention to employ a foreign national al, forestry and fi shery sectors in the case of the Lubelskie Voivodeship (38.3%) List in the Lubelskei Voivodeship and Volyn Oblast (26.4%). The share of those employed in those sectors was, in total the case of all of the analyzed territorial units, much higher than in particular coun- number % tries of reference. This is symptomatic of the bad labor market conditions in those 2008 156 713 18 091 11,5 regions. Agriculture is frequently a reservoir for the so-called hidden unemployment. Participation of those employed in the services sector was highest in the 2009 188 414 21 050 11,2 Lviv Oblast (59.5%) and Volyn Oblast (58.4%) and lowest in the Lubelskie Voivode- ship (43.8%). 2010 180 073 18 148 10,1 2011 259 777 22 059 8,5 Changes in the structure of the employed according to economic sectors in comparison to 2003 were more noticeable in the case of both Ukraini- 2012 243 736 19 325 7,9 an Oblasts which witnessed a marked decrease of the agricultural sector to the benefi t of the services sector. More- over, in each of the analyzed regions Source: Own work on the basis of data of Ministry of Labor and Social Policy. - except for the Bret Oblast – a slight decrease was observed of the share An important premise of cross border of persons employed in industry and links between Poland, Belarus and Ukraine construction. As of 2008, between 156.7 and 259.8 thousand declarations were registered is the infl ow of employees. Between 2003-2012 the un- annually regarding the intention to employ a foreign national (table 2.11). Each employment rate registered in the year, almost half of them were submitted in the Mazowieckie Voivodeship, Low- Lubelskie Voivodeship was at a level er Silesia was second while Lubelskie Voivodeship, with around 20 thousand of around 11.2% to 17.8%, in the Lviv declarations, ranked third. From among the persons seeking employment in the Oblast from 1.5% to 6.0%, in the Volyn Oblast between 1.8% to 4.1%, while in the Lubelskie Voivodeship Ukrainian citizens dominated (95.9% in 2012), the share of Brest Oblast the offi cial unemployment rate registered in the analyzed period did not exceed 2%. Better comparability is achieved in the case of data regarding the 15 Border movement and the fl ow of goods and services in the eastern border of the unemployment rate obtained by analyzing the Population’s Economic Activity14, European Union on the territory of Poland in 2012, Statistical Offi ce in Rzeszów 2013 which are available only for Polish and the Ukrainian part of the Border. Accord- page 101-102. ing to these data in 2011 the level of unemployment in the Lubelskie Voivodeship 16 The necessary condition to employ a foreigner in this mode is to conclude an em- amounted to 10.6%, in the Volyn Oblast – 8.1%, while in the Lviv Oblast – 7.7%. ployment agreement, additionally an earlier registration in the Poviat Labor Offi ce is necessary in the form of a written declaration regarding the intention to employ a foreign 14 According to the International Labor Organization methodology. national.

56 57 Belarusian citizens was much lower (2.3%). The relative signifi cance of the Lubel- lenge is to stop the population outfl ow of young, educated and professionally skie Voivodeship as a place of employment for the citizens of Ukraine is surely active persons. due to geographical proximity to the Polish-Ukrainian border and to such cities as Lviv and Łuck as well as the presence of an array of transport trails leading from  The discussed cross border region has at its disposal a relative young society, Ukraine to Warsaw. It is not impossible that part of the workers from Ukraine treat which translates into having signifi cant production age population, including Lubelskie Voivodeship only as the fi rst stage of professional migration, ultimately the mobile production age. Negative processes related to population ageing, seeking employment on the territory of the Mazowiecie Voivodeship17. Data re- measured by the demographic youth coeffi cient and the demographic burden garding issued work permits for foreign nationals confi rms the relative signifi cance indicator are here less intense than EU average. In the coming years we will, of the Lubelski labor market for Ukrainian and Belarusian nationals (table 10). however, witness the shift of subsequent cohorts in the direction of post-pro- Between 2008 and 2012 their number was systematically increasing, while the ductive age. share of permits issued to the citizens of both countries was oscillating between 73% and 86%.  An important advantage of the analyzed macroregion is a relatively high level of education of its inhabitants and, what is worth pointing out, there has been an almost two-fold increase in the number of persons with higher education in comparison to the beginning of the XXI century.

Table 2.12. Work permits for foreign nationals issued in the Lubelskie Voivodeship  The employment structure of the analyzed cross border region is characterized with signifi cant participation rate of persons employed in the broadly understood agricultural sector. It is a consequence of an old economic structure Issued 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 generating an insuffi cient number of jobs in the remaining sectors. The anal- work ysis of the transformations of the employment structure between 2003 and permits fi gure % fi gure % fi gure % fi gure % fi gure % 2011 indicates a gradual decrease of persons employed in agriculture, their share markedly exceeds, however, the average reported in the countries of Total 381 100,0 553 100,0 619 100,0 837 100,0 1059 100,0 reference. out of which:  The unemployment level in the analyzed regions does not, however, diverge Belaru- from the average values for particular countries. Surely, the relatively high per- sian 167 43,8 183 33,1 191 30,1 223 26,6 274 25,9 centage of agricultural workers has an infl uence on such a situation, which citizens may be an evidence of the so-called hidden unemployment. The average Ukrainian 39,1 220 39,8 283 45,7 464 55,4 632 59,7 monthly gross remuneration is decisively lower than the national average. This citizens refl ects the unfavorable situation of the regional labor markets of the analyzed macroregion, and the resulting partial outfl ow of workforce. Source: Own work on the basis of data of Ministry of Labor and Social Policy. Institutes of higher education are an important element of the social potential of the analyzed cross border region. In 2011/2012 they educated 296.0 thousand students, with the Lviv Oblast’s share of around 131.2 thousand students (44.3%), Lubelskie Voivodeship - 96.2 thousand (32.5%), Brest Oblast  In 2011 the analyzed cross border area was inhabited by 7 142.8 thousand – 36.9 thousand students (12.5%) and Volyn Oblast – 31.7 thousand students persons, with a relatively low population density of around 73 persons per 1 (10.7%). In the current structure of local institutes of higher education, the analyz- km2. Southwestern part of the region was characterized by much bigger popu- ed region includes the following academic centers: lation density than the relatively sparsely populated northeastern part. Urbani- zation indicator is also relatively low reaching the average value of 56.4%. The  Lviv - the most important academic center of the analyzed cross border region settlement network of the analyzed cross border region is relatively weak and (108.7 thousand students in 2011) and one of the biggest academic centers in dispersed, especially in the northeastern part of the macroregion. Moreover, in the Ukraine. Over 20 institutes of higher education are located here including: each of the analyzed territorial units, the dominance of the regional capitals is Ivan Franko National University of Lviv Lviv Polytehnic University, Lviv Acad- clearly visible in the urban settlement network. emy of Commerce, Lviv Agricltural Academy, Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University, The Lviv National Academy of Arts, The Mykola Lysenko  One of the biggest threats to the socio-economic development of the analyzed Lviv National Music Academy and many others; cross border macroregion is the gradually progressing process of depopulation. The last several years have witnessed a systematic decrease of the  Lublin – second largest academic center in the analyzed cross border re- population of the analyzed cross border macroregion, with demographic fore- gion (80.8 thousand students in 2011) and sixth biggest academic center in casts not showing any possibility of the trend’s reversal. Between 2003-2001 Poland. It is the seat of 9 institutions of higher education including: Maria Cu- the number of the citizens of the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian border region rie-Skłodowska University, John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin (KUL), Lu- decreased by 145.7 thousand persons. Negative natural growth rate and neg- blin University of Technology, University of Life Sciences, Medical University ative migration balance both have decisive infl uence on such a state of affairs. and many others; The analyzed regions belong, therefore, primarily to outfl ow regions which is not compensated by natural growth rate. An important developmental chal-  Łuck - the most important academic center in the Volyn Oblast, second biggest in the Ukrainian part of the border region and third in the entire analyzed area (26.6 thousand students), it is the seat of 8 institutes of higher educa- 17 T. Komornicki, A. Miszczuk, Transgraniczne powiązania województw Polski wschodniej (Cross border links between voivodeships of Eastern Poland). The expert tion, including the Lesia Ukrainka Eastern European National University, Łuck analysis study performed at the request of the Ministry of Regional Development to up- Technical University and others; date the Strategy for socio-economic development of Easter Poland until 2020 page 29, http://www.mrr.gov.pl/rozwoj_regionalny/Polityka_regionalna/Strategia_rozwoju_polski_  Brest - one of the biggest academic centers in Belarus (21.1 thousand stu- wschodniej_do_2020/Dokumenty/Docu ments/ekspertyza_graniczna_411.pdf (accessed: dents), the seat of 2 institutes of higher education: A.S. Puszkin Brest State 26 August 2013). University and Brest State Technical University;

58 59  Baranowicze - second after Brest most important academic center in the the seed of a Polish-Ukrainian University. This initiative was abandoned in 2011 Brest Oblast (9.9 thousand students) is the seat of the Baranowicze State Uni- and the education of PhD students in EKPiUU (European Collegiate of Polish and versity; Ukrainian Universities) was taken over by the Maria Curie-Skłodowska Universi- ty’s Central-Eastern Europe Center and the KUL Center for Society and Culture of  Drohobycz – second (after Lviv) most important academic center in the Lviv Eastern Europe. Oblast (9.8 thousand students), is the seat of several institutes of higher education including Iwana Franki Pedagogical University and Gas and Oil Insti- Educating students from tute; abroad is one of the most important factors determining the devel- From the beginning of the 1990 of the  Biała Podlaska (5.9 thousand students) – being the seat of the Pope John opment of academic centers in the XX century the cooperation of Institutes Paul II University in Biała Podlaska and the External Department of Physical conditions of the forecasted drop Education University Academy in Warsaw; in birth rate. Almost 3.2 thousand of Higher Education from the Lubelskie foreigners were being educated in  Pińsk (5.8 thousand students) – seat of the Polesie National University, branch the 2012/2013 academic year in the Voivodeship, and Ukrainian and Belarusian of the National Agricultural Academy and the branch of the Belarusian Nation- Lubelskie Voivodeship, while the border regions has been developing al Veterinary Academy; number of foreign students to the total number of students amounted successfully. It assumes, primarily, the  Zamość (4.0 thousand students) – seat of the University of Management and to 4.0%. Foreign students seemed Administration, Szymon Szymonowicz State Higher School of Vocational Edu- to be particularly attracted to the form of joint conferences and seminars as cation, Jan Zamoyski College of Humanities and Economics in Zamość; following public universities: Med- well as research project. Moreover, Polish ical University in Lublin (1055 stu-  Chełm (3.6 thousand students) – seat of The State School of Higher Education dents of this university came from Institutes of Higher Education eagerly in Chelm and Higher School of International Relations and Social Communica- abroad), Maria Curie-Skłodowska beneﬁ t from the aid of Belarusian and tions in Chelm. University (472) and National Vo- cational College in Zamość (325). Ukrainian academic staff. On the analyzed cross border area there are two very big higher educa- Among the non-public institutes of tion centers (above 50 thousand students), i.e. Lviv and Lublin, two major center higher education the unquestiona- (between 10 thousand and 50 thousand students), i.e. Łuck and Brest, three me- ble leader in the number of foreign dium centers (between 5 and 10 thousand students), i.e. Baranowicze, Droho- students was the John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin (346). Most foreign bycz, Biała Podlaska and Pińsk and several smaller centers (below 5 thousand nationals studying at institutes of higher education in the Lubelskie Voivodeship students) from among which Zamość and Chełm are the most important ones. came from the Ukraine (47.9% of the total number of studying foreigners) and Taking into consideration the number of students per 1000 citizens, it turns out Belarus (8.5%), which was to a large extent determined by the proximity of the that higher education plays the most vital role in Lublin (232 students per 1000 in- national border. Foreigners constitute also a signiﬁ cant number of students of Lviv habitants), with Lviv (143) and Łuck (127) ranked second and third. Lviv and Lublin universities, e.g. 907 foreign nationals were being educated at the Daniel Halicki academic centers offer the most comprehensive educational offer on the Pol- Lviv Medical University in the 2012/2013 academic year including many Poles19 ish-Belarusian-Ukrainian border. In the academic year 2011/2012 the Lviv Oblast educated primarily students of social, economic and legal departments (33.6%), technical-engineering (17.5%) as well as humanistic and artistic (11.2%), in the Lubelskie Voivodeship – economic and administrative (16.5%), medical (12.8%), pedagogical (10.7%), social (9.4%) and humanistic 8.7%), in the Brest Oblast – social (42.7%), pedagogical (20.3%), technical and technological (12.6%) as well as architecture and construction (10.1%), and in the Volyn Oblast economic and administrative (17.1%), pedagogical (16.3%), technical-engineering (13.6%) and humanistic (7.7%)18. The Institutes of Higher Education located on the Polish-Be- larusian-Ukrainian border region also have a broad offer of PhD studies. In the academic year of 2011/2012 the biggest number of PhD students were educated at the Lubelskie Voivodeship’s Institutes of Higher Education (2799 persons) and the Lviv Oblast (2787). Decisively smaller number of PhD students studied in the Higher Education Institutes of the Volyn Oblast (462) persons and the Brest Oblast (92 persons).

From the beginning of the 1990 of the XX century the cooperation of In- stitutes of Higher Education from the Lubelskie Voivodeship, and Ukrainian and Belarusian border regions has been developing successfully. It assumes, primarily, the form of joint conferences and seminars as well as research project. Moreover, Polish Institutes of Higher Education eagerly beneﬁ t from the aid of Be- larusian and Ukrainian academic staff. Another example of the Polish-Ukrainian cooperation in higher education was the creation in 2000 of a European Collegiate of Polish and Ukrainian Universities in Lublin, which was supposed to become

18 Data for the Lviv Oblast have been presented according to the classifi cation of courses of study as per the classifi cation of the National Statistics Committee of Ukraine, for the Brest Oblast - according to the classifi cation of the National Statistical Committee of the Republic of Belarus, while for the Lubelskie Voivodeship and the Volyn Oblast - data 19 http://www.meduniv.lviv.ua/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id= as per the ISCED’97 UNESCO International Classifi cation. 1110&Itemid=343&lang=uk (accessed: 28 August 2013).

60 61 2.2.4 CROSS BORDER COOPERATION POTENTIAL

INFRASTRUCTURE POTENTIAL

Transport infrastructure constitutes one of the most relevant factors that permanently shapes the groundwork for socio-economic development. Transport routes are paramount in determining spatial accessibility, thus translating into growth of competitiveness of a given area both in terms of its ability to attract investment as well as competitiveness of export.

62 63 through Zamość and Hrubieszów to the Polish-Ukrainian border. It connects Up- per Silesia with the eastern national border with a board gauge railway system, making it possible to transport goods from Ukraine, and also Russia, Central Asia and Far East without the necessity of a time consuming reloading on the border. The line’s main management infrastructure is located in Hrubieszów and Zamość. 2.2.4 The importance of the access to this line cannot be overestimated in the context of potential development of trade exchange and economic cooperation between Proximity to national and international routes, and thus access to su- East and West. Transport of goods via the Transsiberian trail from the countries pranational transport infrastructure translates directly into the investment of the Far East to the West of Europe with the use of the Steelwork-Broad Rail friendliness which boosts the value of economic space and increases the line takes about 15-20 days less than via the alternative sea route, allowing to possibilities of absorption of egzogenic growth factors. Proximity to the radically cut transport costs. Additionally, the Hrubieszów, Zamość-Boratycze, Paneuropean corridor belts is highly relevant in this context. Peripheral Szczebrzeszyn and Biłgoraj stations are connected to the 1435 mm wide railway location of the Lviv Oblast may also be mitigated by being located close lines. to the most important European transport routes20. Road infrastructure is the basic category of the transport infrastructure (fi g. 2.17). From among Railway is a decisive element as far as the external and internal availability of the most relevant transnational road corridors on the analyzed regions the the analyzed cross border region is concerned. Its relevance is confi rmed by the ones worth mentioning include: fact that in Belarus it manages 74% of transported goods, over half of goods transport in the  the E30 international route (trail includes the national route number 2 along Ukraine (52%) and over one third with the parts of the A2 motorway on the territory of Poland and the M1 major passenger transport (37%)23, Location of the analyzed area on the highway on the territory of Belarus): Berlin – Poznań – Warszawa– Siedlce while in Poland where this type – Biała Podlaska – Brześć – Mińsk – Smoleńsk – Moskwa, creating one of of transport is decisively less im- main transit trails between the west and the key corridors in Europe on the east-west axis (II Paneuropean Transport portant – around 13% of trans- the east of Europe is, therefore, benefi cial Corridor); ported goods. and constitutes a solid basis for the  E372 international route (trail includes the national route number 17 along with The basic diffi cultly in rail- the parts of the S17 expressway on the territory of Poland and the M09 inter- way transport between Poland development of international road and national road on the territory of Ukraine): Warsaw – Lublin – Zamość – Lviv, and Belarus and Ukraine is the railway transport systems. located in the designed transport corridor Via Intermare, creating the shortest axis spread in the undercar- connection of the Baltic Sea (Gdańsk) with the Black Sea (Odessa); riage, caused by different width of railway tracks (1524 mm in the  E373 international route (trail includes the fragment of the national road num- Belarus and Ukraine as opposed ber 12 along with the parts of the S12 expressway in the territory of Poland to 1435 mm in Poland). The necessity to exchange the axis during border crossing and the M07 international highway in the territory of Ukraine): Lublin – Chełm by the rolling stock largely prolongs border crossing time, signifi cantly limiting the – Kowel – Sarny – Korosteń – Kiev, constituting the shortest trail connecting effectiveness of the railway transport in the cross border and international context. Kiev with the Western Europe. Transport infrastructure in the discussed cross border area plays a signifi cant Railway infrastructure is equally relevant for the accessibility of the regions role in the transport system of particular countries as well as in the international (fi g. 2.17). The most important railway trails in the analyzed region include21:: context. Location of the analyzed area on the main transit trails between the west and the east of Europe is, therefore, benefi cial and constitutes a  E20/C-E20 international railway line (railway line number 2 and 3 in Poland solid basis for the development of international road and railway transport and the Brześć – Mińsk major highway in Belarus): Kunowice – Poznań – systems. The use of the transit surface requires, however, the upgrade and mod- Warszawa – Terespol – Brześć – Mińsk, which is part of the II Paneuropean ernization of a network of highways, expressways and ring roads, railway lines transport corridor connecting Berlin and Moscow22; and infrastructure as well as border infrastructure.

 The E30 international railway line (railway line number 7 in Poland and the Kowel – Kiev railway line in the Ukraine), constituting the shortest connection between Warszawa and Kiev with the broad rail section on the Polish territory (from Zawadówki to the state border);

 Broad Gauge Metallurgy Line, from Sławków in the Silesian Voivodeship

20 B. Kawałko, Infrastruktura komunikacyjna, (Transport infrastructure), [in:] Pograni- cze polsko-ukraińskie (Polish-Ukrainian border area). Environment. Society. Economy, eds. B. Kawałko, A. Miszczuk, Zamość 2005, page 173. 21 The E30/C-E30 railway line crosses the territory of the Lviv Oblast on the following trail: Drezno – Zgorzelec – Wrocław – Kraków – Medyka – Lwów – Kijów, leading to Mos- cow. Due to methodological assumptions of this paper it is, however, not included in the analysis. 22 Included in the European Agreement on Main International Railway Lines (AGC), prepared in Geneva on 31 May, 1985. (Journal Of laws dated 1989, number 42, item 231) and the Important International Combined Transport Lines and Related Installations (AGTC), prepared in Geneva dated 1 February 1991. (Monitor Polski dated 2004 Number 3, item 50). 23 Data for 2009.

64 65 Fig. 2. 17. Transport and border infrastructure Fig. 2.18. Average vehicle trafﬁ c intensity in 2010.

Source: Own work

Analysis of average daily road traffi c on the most important transnational transport trails running through the area of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Brest Oblast and Volyn Oblast, confi rms the true signifi cance of the E-30, E-372 and E-373 routes (on the Kowla section) in transit traffi c (fi g. 2.18). A relevant threat emerges, however, in the form of the growing importance of alternative transport trails, including, fi rst of all, the E-40 route, managed on the territory of Poland by the A4 highway. One observes also a partial shift of the transit to Russia from the Polish-Belarusian border (E-30 trail) to the Polish-Lithuanian border, which in the territory of Poland is managed by the national route number 8 (along with the parts of the S8 express way)..

Despite a beneﬁ cial location close to important international transport corridors, conditions guaranteeing external accessibility, the analyzed border area of the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian border is characterized by low density of road and railway infrastructure (table 2.13), which is one of the basic factors determining spatial integration, which is decisive in its accessibility and internal coherence. The density of public roads with hard surface per 100 km2 is highest in the Lubelskie Voivodeship (84.9 km per 100 km2 in comparison to 89.7 km per

66 67 100 km2 in Poland). The values are far lower in the Lviv Oblast (37.6 km per 100 Poland (Warszawa, Kraków, Wrocław), Italy (Mediolan, Neapol, Venice), Ger- km2 in comparison to 27.5 km per 100 km2 in the Ukraine), in the Brest Oblast many (Munich, Dortmund), Austria (Vienna), Rumania (Timiszoara), Russia (31.9 km per 100 km2 with average density of 36 km per 100 km2 in Belarus) and (Moscva-Domodiedowo and Moscva-Wnukowo), Turkey (Istambul), Israel (Tel in Volyn Oblast (28.5 km per 100 km2). Aviv-Jafa), United Arab Emirates (Dubaj) and Egipt (Hurgada), numerous charter connections, as well as national connections (to Kijev)24; in 2012 it provided services to 576 thousand persons;

 Table 2.13. Municipal infrastructure Lublin Airport in Świdnik – new regional Polish airport opened in December 2012 , realizes international connections to Great Britain (Londyn-Stansted, Londyn-Luton, Liverpool), Ireland (Dublin) and Norway (Oslo), charter connec- Lubelskie Brest Lviv Volyn List Voivodeship Oblast Oblast Oblast tions to Turkey (Antalya) and Bulgaria (Burgas), as well as temporary national connections (Gdańsk), during the ﬁ rst 8 months in 2013 it provided services to Public roads with hard surface 21 325,1 10 462,0 8 198,9 5 761,0 127 thousand passengers25; in km

Public roads with hard surface 89,7 31,9 37,6 28,5  Brest International Airport - connection to Russia (Kaliningrad) and season- in km per 100 km2 al charter connection to Turkey (Antalya) and Bulgaria (Burgas).

Used railway lines in km 1 041,0 1 062,0 1 269,0 596,8 At present, the level of air traffi c infrastructure development in the analyzed cross border region seems to be suffi cient, however, taking into con- Used railway lines in km per 4,1 3,2 5,8 3,0 sideration the observed constant growth of demand for air transport services, the 100 km2 future modernization of the airport in Brest and the planned launch of the airport in Łuck, which could expand the network of airports in the analyzed area, seem to be necessary. It seems that convincing carriers to open new connections that Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the include airports in the analyzed cross border region seems to be a much bigger Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce of the Volyn Oblast challenge. Surely, the air goods transport infrastructure requires an upgrade. This regards primarily the Lubelskie Voivodeship. The construction of a cargo terminal would constitute another impulse for the development of the airport in Lublin and would expand the capabilities of the Voivodeship as regards foreign trade.

It is worth pointing out that in the case of the Lubelskie Voivodeship the val- One of the key elements of the transport infrastructure in the context of in- ue of this indicator grew markedly in comparison to 2003 (from the level of 71.2 ternational contacts is the network of border crossings and the accompanying km per 100 km2). In the case of the two remaining oblasts the density growth of logistical infrastructure. There are 10 different border crossings on the analyzed public roads has had far lower values. The development of road infrastructure is area between Poland and Belarus, Poland and Ukraine: disproportionate to the growth of the number of cars. In comparison to year 2003 the number of passenger cars in the analyzed region has grown signifi cantly – by  Terespol-Małaszewicze/Brest – railway crossing on the Polish-Belarusian 27.9% in the case of the Volyn Oblast, 28.3% in the case of the Lviv Oblast and border, operates passenger and goods traffi c. 66.3% in the case of the Lubelskie Voivodeship.  Kukuryki/Kozłowicze – road crossing on the Polish-Belarusian border, oper- Lviv Oblast has biggest density of railway network – 5.8 m per km2. In the ates passenger and goods traffi c. remaining regions that level amounts to 3 km per 100 km2, in the Volyn Oblast, 3.2 km per 100 km2 in the Brest Oblast and 4.1 km per 100 km2 in Lubelskie  Terespol/Brześć – road crossing on the Polish-Belarusian border, operates Voivodeship. In each case these indicators are much lower than the average of passenger and goods traffi c of vehicles of up to 3.5 tonnes; the particular countries of reference. Furthermore, due to the deteriorating railway infrastructure and decreasing demand for railway transport services, part of the  Sławatycze/Domaczewo – road crossing on the Polish-Belarusian border, railway lines are taken off the system and are no longer used. Between 2003-2011 operates passenger traffi c (except for busses); the combined length of the railway lines on the analyzed region decreased by 52.6 km.  Dorohusk/Jagodzin – railway crossing on the Polish-Ukrainian border, operates passenger and goods traffi c. The attractiveness of the region is, to a large extend, determined by the quality of the transport infrastructure. The basic problems in this scope include  Dorohusk/Jagodzin – road crossing on the Polish-Ukrainian border, oper- a highway and expressways network (apart from the fragment of the S12/S17 ates passenger and goods traffi c; expressway in the Lubelskie Voivodeship and the M1 road in Belarus), low quality of roads unadjusted to the traffi c intensity and bad road surface condition, as  Zosin/Uściług – road crossing on the Polish-Ukrainian border, operates pas- well as transit through intensely urbanized areas. Low density of roads and senger and goods traffi c; their low quality to a large extent limit the internal coherence of the analyzed area as a whole as well as its constituent regions. Therefore, a continuous expansion  Hrubieszów/Włodzimierz Wołyński – railway crossing on the Polish-Ukrain- and modernization of transport infrastructure is necessary, with emphasis put on ian border, operates passenger and goods traffi c (currently no passenger train the development of accessibility-boosting expressway network that would stimu- traffi c); late economic development.  Hrebenne/Rawa Ruska – road crossing on the Polish-Ukrainian border, oper- Three civil international airports are located on the discussed cross border ates passenger and goods traffi c; area:

 Lviv Danylo Halytskyi International Airport – has at its disposal a new ter- 24 http://www.lvivairport.info/schedule-2013/ (accessed: 17 August, 2013). minal, released for use on April 2012; operates international connections to 25 http://airport.lublin.pl (accessed: 20 September, 2013).

68 69  Hrebenne/Rawa Ruska – railroad crossing on the Polish-Ukrainian border, operates passenger and traffi c, currently closed26. Fig. 2.19. Main nods of border traffi c in the eastern external Polish border in 2012. Additionally, in 2013 new road crossing will be opened on the Polish-Ukraini- an border, operating passenger and goods traffi c with vehicles of up to 3.5 tones located in Dołhobyczowie/Uhrynowie.

Table 2.14. Characteristics of border infrastructure.

Polish-Belarusian Polish-Ukrainian List Border: Border: 2003 2012 2003 2012 Length of the border in the Lubelskie 170 170 296 296 Voivodeship (in km) Border crossings in general 4 4 6 5 including: road 3 3 3 3 railway 1 1 3 2 for passenger trafﬁ c 3 3 5 4 for goods trafﬁ c 3 3 4 4 Average length of the border section 57 57 99 99 managed by 1 road crossing (in km) Cross border movement of persons (in 4 958,1 4 255,2 4 838,4 6 448,3 thousands) including foreigners (in %) 92,0 87,7 83,5 81,4 Average number of persons managed Source: Own work on the basis of Border Guard data. 1 239,5 1 063,8 806,4 1 289,7 by 1 border crossing (in thousands)

Source: Own work on the basis of Border Guard data

The highest nation-wide number of border crossing events was recorded in the Korczowa–Medyka–Przemyśl nod in the Podkarpackie Voivodeship (7.3 million persons), located on an important international route E-40. In that time period The length of the border of the Lubelskie Voivodeship with Belarus amounts 4 border traffi c nods located in the Lubelskie Voivodeship (Kukuryki – Terespol, to 170 km (the Polish Ukrainian border is 418 km long), while the length of the Dorohusk, Zosin and Hrebenne) together managed 38.5% of the total border Voivodeship’s border with Ukraine amounts to 296 km (the length of the Pol- traffi c in eastern Poland, which ranked Lubelski Voivodeship fi rst in Poland (fi g. ish-Ukrainian border amounts to 535 km). This means that the value of road bor- 19). Taking into consideration the appropriate level of investment in road and border crossing density indicator on the Belarusian border amounts to 57 km, while der infrastructure (S-12 and S-17 routes) border traffi c nods with Ukraine are lo- on the Ukrainian border – 99 km. Density of road border crossings on the Pol- cated on the territory of the Lublelskie Voivodeship, could take over a bigger part ish-Belarusian border and the Polish-Ukrainian border, both of which are external of the traffi c running, currently, through the E-40 international corridor. EU borders, is, therefore, far smaller than the border crossing existing from 2007 on the western and southern borders with average indicator value of 37.5 km. The number of border crossings and the quality of border infrastructure is insuffi cient, especially with the constantly growing road traffi c, which hinders and slows down cross border cooperation and cross border socio-economic link generation.

Between 2003 and 2012 there was a systematic growth in the number of border crossing events, which slowed down in 2008 (that was related to the stricter visa regulations for the citizens of Belarus and Ukraine) and 2009 (culmination of the global economic crisis). In 2012 border trafﬁ c in the Lubelskie Voivodeship exceeded 10.7 million persons, with over 60% focused on the Polish-Ukrainian border (table 2.15). The border crossing with the biggest trafﬁ c of persons crossing the border is Hrebenne (23.6% of all border crossing events in 2012), Dorohusk (21.6%) and Terespol (21.5%).

26 Launched in 1996, Hrebenne-Rawa Ruska railroad crossing is closed since 2005 when the connection to Rawa Ruska was canceled.

70 71 tive)28. Moreover, the creation of three border crossings is considered: Szcze- piatyn-Korczów, Dyniska Stare-Uhnów and Uśmierz-Waręż29. Table 2.15. Cross border movement of persons as per border crossing events (in thousands)  Important European transport trails run through the analyzed cross border regions including road transport routes (E-30, E-372 and E-373 routes), as Name 2012 of the border 2003 2008 2009 2010 2011 well as railway routes (E20/C-E20, E-30 and LHS). Location of the analyzed crossing total % area on the main transit trails between the west and the east of Europe is, therefore, benefi cial and constitutes a solid basis for the develop- Total 9 796,5 8 766,0 8 089,2 9 236,0 9 684,9 10 707,9 100,0 ment of international road and railway transport systems. They enable to mitigate negative effects of peripheral location of the analyzed regions. The Polish- use of this potential, however, requires the upgrade and modernization of a Belariusian 4 958,1 2 612,0 2 672,0 3 418,8 4 006,1 4 255,2 39,7 network of highways, expressways and ring roads, railway lines and infrastruc- Border ture as well as border infrastructure. Kukuryki (road 400,6 356,6 352,5 424,8 494,4 558,4 5,2  The fundamental drawback of the Polish-Belarusian border is the general border crossing) weakness of the transport infrastructure. The relatively sparsely distributed Sławatycze network of roads, lack of a network of highways and express ways, low (road border 948,6 235,2 202,5 376,8 499,8 653,6 6,1 quality of roads unadjusted to the size of the traffi c and bad road surface. crossing) This, to a large extent, limits the internal coherence of the analyzed macrore- Terespol (road gion as a whole as well as its constituent regions. Moreover, it translates into border 2 538,0 1 454,0 1 680,4 2 120,9 2 349,3 2 297,4 21,5 its low accessibility. crossing)  Terespol An important advantage of the analyzed macroregion is the presence of mod- (railway border 1 070,9 566,2 436,6 496,3 665,5 745,8 7,0 ern airports, which are an element of infrastructure that markedly infl uences crossing) the improvement of its transport accessibility. Convincing carriers to open new connections that include airports in the analyzed cross border region seems Polish- to be a major challenge for the development of air transport on the analyzed Ukrainian 4 838,4 6 153,9 5 417,0 5 817,2 5 678,8 6448,3 60,2 area. Border Dorohusk (road  1 744,4 2 195,3 1 934,9 2 049,8 1 893,8 2 312,6 21,6 The key barrier for the growing cross border traffi c may be the insuffi cient border crossing) number and density of border crossings. The lack of small border crossings, Dorohusk including pedestrian border crossings that handle local traffi c is especial- (railway 179,5 169,7 137,9 130,1 130,5 100,1 0,9 ly troublesome. Such border crossings manage especially all socio-economic crossing) relations generated by areas directly adjacent to the border. There is a need to develop the already existing ones as well as build new border crossings. Ad- Hrebenne (road 2 047,5 2 101,1 2 133,0 2 312,5 2 307,3 2 525,3 23,6 ditionally, the limitation of border traffi c is also due to legal and procedural bar- border crossing) riers related to the functioning of visa regulations, which are a consequence of Hrebenne Poland’s membership in the European Union. (railway border 65,1 ------crossing)* Hrubieszów (railway border 11,8 16,1 12,5 15,0 18,3 17,7 0,2 crossing) Zosin (road 790,1 1 671,8 1 198,8 1 309,8 1 328,8 1 492,7 13,9 border crossing) * See footnote. 26.

Source: Own work on the basis of Border Guard data.

 Apart from the insuffi cient traffi c fl ow of border crossings managing international transit routes, the lack of small border crossings is equally troublesome, including crossings only for pedestrians that regulated local traffi c. There is a need to develop the already existing ones as well as build new border crossings. According to the intergovernmental arrangements27, the construction of new border crossings is planned in Włodawa-Tomaszówka, Kodeń-Stradlicze and Wygoda-Kostary (on the Polish-Belarusian border) and in Zbereże-Ad- amczuki, Oserdów-Bełz and Kryłów-Krzeczów or Dubienka-Kładnów (alterna-

28 Change of the spatial development plan of the Lubelskie Voivodeship. External 27 Agreement between Poland and Belarusian International Coordination for: Cross conditions - synthesis, Offi ce of Spatial Planning in Lublin, Lublin 2009, page 63-64. border cooperation and Polish-Ukrainian International Coordinating Committee for Cross 29 Border crossing Waręż/Uśmierz managed cross border traffi c until 2003 as per Border Cooperation. agreements on simplifi ed border crossing by citizens residing in border towns.

72 73 2.2.5 CROSS BORDER COOPERATION POTENTIAL

TOURISM POTENTIAL

The opportunity to develop tourism in a given region is determined by demand i.e. the level of tourist trafﬁ c and by its tourist attractions and tourist infrastructure, which are an exit point for the creation of tourism products (tourist offer).

74 75 monuments with signifi cant historical, cultural and architectural values.32 These include numerous religious buildings as well as the Butrymowicz family Palace in Pińsk called “The Pearl of Polesie”, original towns of Motol and Bezdeż, the town of Kamieniec along with the impressive White tower from the XIII century, building of the so-called Struve Geodetic Arc entered into the list of the UNESCO 2.2.5 world heritage list as well as the famous Brest fortress from 1833. Additionally, on the territory of the Brest Oblast there are numerous Orthodox Churches and The Polish-Ukrainian-Belarusian border region is rich in tourist atrac- Catholic Churches as well as ruins of marvelous palaces of Polish lords including: tions including tangible and intangible cultural heritage. Numerous monu- neo-gothic palaces of the Pusłowscy family in Kosów Poleski and the Sapieh fam- ments and historic sites, including those listed by UNESCO30 are an impor- ily palace in Różanów. The biggest tourist attraction of the Brest Oblast, however, tant value for the development of tourism. Additionally, the analyzed cross is the Białowieska Forest and the popular – especially among children – seat of border area includes vast unpolluted areas with natural and landscape val- Dziadek Mróz (Father Frost), which is visited each year by around: 190 tourists33. ues. The region’s attractiveness from the point of view of the tourist industry Certain tourist attractions are especially popular including the nostalgic visits to is strengthened by the multicultural nature of the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrain- Polesie Pińskie related to the life of T. Kościuszko and A. Mickiewicz and hunting ian region that has been shaped through centuries of mutual coexistence in the forests of the Brest, Kamienicki, Iwacewicki, Małorycki and Prużański re- of representatives of different nationalities. The mixing of different national gions. and cultural groups has bore the fruit of a rich and diverse cultural The Lviv Oblast is host to around four thousand historic monuments, which heritage, visible both in architec- constitutes around 25% of their total number in the Ukraine. The biggest grouping ture as well as customs of local of historic monuments could be found in Lviv, with its old town architectural com- The Polish-Ukrainian-Belarusian border population. plex that was entered onto the UNESCO’s list of world cultural heritage. The most precious historical sites in Lviv include the gothic cathedral of Latin rite along with region is rich in tourist attractions including the Boim Chapel, Greco-Catholic. Saint George’s Cathedral, Dominican Church, According to the data of the Na- Armenian Cathedral, post-Bernardine Church of Saint Andrew Apostle (currently tangible and intangible cultural heritage. tional Heritage Institute, on the ter- a Greco-Catholic Orthodox Church) Uspieński Othodox Church, Korniakta tower, ritory o the Lubelskie Voivodeship a market surrounded with 44 tenement houses, Potonicki family palace, opera there are 3531 monuments entered building and the building of the I. Franki University. The Łyczakowski commentary into the historical monuments list 31. In is also of historic and nostalgic signifi cance. It is a place of fi nal rest of distin- this regard Lubelskie Voivodeship ranks 9th from among the Polish voivodeships. guished citizen’s of Lviv of different nationalities since the end of XVIII century. The most precious object located in the voivodeship is the urban complex of the Numerous castles, including the castles in Olesk, Złoczów, Podhorce and Świrz, Old Town in Zamość, entered on the UNESCO world heritage list, including, inter are very popular among tourists. They are a part of the so-called “Lviv’s Golden alia, the town hall, which is one of the prettiest late-renaissance buildings in Po- Hood”. Drohobycz is also of key importance to the tourist industry. Tourists can land, Collegiate Church, Zamoyski family palace, numerous tenement houses with visit numerous churches and Orthodox churches including the XV century As- arcades and fortifi cation buildings. The so-called presidential list of monuments sumption Church, the Holy Cross Church and the church of Saint Bartholomew considered as Monuments of History of the Polish State – apart from the already the Orthodox Cathedral of Saint George from the turn of the XV and XVI century, mentioned historical town complex in Zamość – includes also Kazimierz Dolny grand synagogue and the house of Brunon Schulz, as well as Żółkiew from the be- along with the nearby towns, the palace-park complex of the Zamoyski family ginning of the XVII century, Saint Lawrence Collegiate Church, Dominican monas- in Kozłówka and the historical architectural-urban complex of Lublin. It includes, tery and church, as well as Basilian monastery and church. On the area of the Lviv among other things, the Old Town build in the middle ages, king’s castle from the Oblast one can admire also numerous examples of wooden sacral architecture. XIV century, re-constructed in the I half of XIX century along with the defense tow- Some of them – in Zółkiew, Drohobycz, Potylicz and Mataków – were included er (donjoun) from the XIII century and a gothic chapel of the Holy Trinity covered under special protection under the UNESCO’s world heritage list. The most impor- with unique Russo-Byzantine frescos as well as numerous tenement houses and tant centers of religious tourism are the Krechów Monastery in the Żółkiew region churches characteristic for the town’ and region’s style i.e. Lubelski Renaissance, from the beginning of the XVII century and Ławra Uniowska in the Przemyśl region baroque cathedral and the Dominican cluster basilica. Three of the historical sites from XIV – XVIII century. Due to the exceptional health promotion opportunities located in Lublin: Saint Stanislaus Church along with the Dominican church, St. as well as numerous mineral water intakes with health-promoting properties, there Trinity Chapel and the Lubelska Union monument were also entered into the Eu- is a number of health resorts which are especially popular among tourists includ- ropean heritage list as symbols of European integration, supranational heritage ing: Truskawiec, Morszyn, Niemirów, Szkło and Lubień Wielki. Karpaty Mountains of democracy and tolerance and dialogue of culture between East and West. A located in the south-eastern part of the Lviv Oblast are a perfect place to foster number of castles and manors are also located in the Lubelskie Voivodeship (in- the development of mountain tourism and skiing. The most important ski resorts cluding castle ruins), palaces and manors (including Janowiec, Kazimierz Dolny, include Sławsko, Tysowiec, Rozłucz and Turka34. Puławy, Nałęczów, Kock, Rejowiec, Kryłów, Krupe, Lubartów, Radzyń Podlaski), religious buildings (both Roman-Catholic, as well as Orthodox and Protestant) and The number of protected historic monuments on the territory of the Volyn unique small town urban complexes. On the territory of the Lubelskie Voivode- Oblast exceeds one thousand two hundred. Many of them are located in the ship there are also two health resorts (Nałęczów and Krasnobród) and lands rich Oblast’s capital – Łuck. The most precious historic monuments of this town in- in tourist and landscape values located in Roztocze and Łęczyńsko-Włodawskie clude: the Górny castle (so-called Lubart castle) from the XIII-XIV century, Our lake district. Lady of Care Orthodox Church from the XIII-XV century, Saint Peter and Paul Cathedral from the XVII century, Triumph of the Holy Cross Orthodox Church On the territory of the Brest Oblast there are over two thousand historical from the XVII century, Trinity Orthodox Church from the XVII century, synagogue from the XVII century and an Evangelical-Augsburgian Church from the beginning of the XX century. One the Ukrainian side of the border one can fi nd the unique 30 There are fi ve objects listed on the UNESCO world heritage list including, the city of Zamość in the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Białowieska Forest and the Struve Geodetic Arc 32 Дзяржаўны спіс гісторыка-культурных каштоўнасцей Рэспублікі Беларусь, in the Brest Oblast, and on the territory of the Lviv Oblast - historical center of Lviv and Мінск 2009. wooden Orthodox churches of the Carpathian region in Poland and Ukraine. 33 http://brest-region.gov.by/index.php/en/society/tourism/889-tourist-brest-region. 31 Status as at 31 December, 2012. 34 http://touristinfo.lviv.ua/uk/lviv/region/.

76 77 Museum of Volyn Icons, with the wonderful icon of Our Lady of Chełm from the XI century. Many precious and interesting sites are also to be found in Włodzimi- erz Wołyński, former Red Ruthenia stronghold and a capital city of the medieval Table 2.16.Tourist Accommodation Facilities in 2011. Wołyńsko-Halickie Duchy. The most important ones include the Dormition of Holy Virgin Mary Orthodox Church from the XII century, Saint Basil Orthodox Church Accommodation Guests from the XIII-XIV century and the remains of a medieval stronghold. In Zimne, facilities (in thousands) provided ac- close to Włodzimierz Wołyński, it is possible to visit the Dormition of Holy Virgin List Sites including commodation including Mary Monastery called “Świętogórski” from the turn of the X and XI century, which total total foreign (in thousands) annually is one of the oldest such buildings in the Ukraine. The Ołyka town also has big touristsi tourist relevance. It is an old residence of the Radziwiłł family with a castle from Lubelskie the turn of the XVI and XVII century, St. Peter and Paul Church from XVI century 273 18 232 11 870 655,1 97,7 1 487,7 and the Saint Trinity Collegiate from the XVII century. In the case of the Volyn Voivodeship Oblast natural values also have signiﬁ cant tourist relevance, they include forest areas in the north part of the region with small anthropogenic pressure and signif- Brest Oblast 129 11 009 9 877 405,3 130,1 2 054,4 icant potential for the development of recreation tourism. This applies particularly 30 to the Szacki Lake District along with the Świtaź Lake, located in the north-west- Lviv Oblast 317 16 297 627,2 123,2 4 246,1 ern part of the Oblast. 295

Multi-layered character of the cultural heritage and natural values on the ana- Volyn Oblast 130 5 954 3 135 116,7 8,5 594,6 lyzed regions underlines the potential for the development of tourism in the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian cross border area. The architectural diversity including buildings in historic towns as well as numerous castles, palaces and Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the sacral buildings of different religions is decisive in determining the character of Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce of the Volyn Oblast. the border area. The region is unique in the whole of European Union and offers benefi cial conditions for the development of tourism. Since many of the most precious tourist attractions are located close to the border, there is The biggest accommodation facility base in the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian Multi-layered character of the cultural signifi cant potential to develop joint border is located in Lviv Oblast with 30.3 thousand i.e. 46.3% from all of the 65.5 initiative in the scope of cross bor- thousand accommodation facilities located in that area in 2011 (fi g. 2.20). The heritage and natural values on the der tourism. Nevertheless, there are Lviv Oblast offers half (4.3 million) of all accommodations. Lubelskie Voivodeship obstacles to the border movement includes 18.2 thousand accommodation facilities (27.8% of the total fi gure), 11 tho- analyzed regions underlines the potential including insuffi cient accessibility usand are located in the Brest Oblast (16.8%), while 6.0 thousand (9.2%) can be for the development of tourism in the (transport), lack of border crossings found in the Volyn Oblast. Accommodation facilities in the Lubelskie Voivodeship as well as visa requirements. in 2011 offered around 2.1 million accommodations, in the Brest Oblast - 1.5 mil- Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian cross border lion, while in the Volyn Oblast - 0.6 million (table 2.16). In order to preserve the common area. multicultural heritage of the border area many cultural events are organized including: three cultures fes- tival in Włodawa which combine tradition and Jewish, Orthodox and Catholic religions, the Jagielloński Fair in Lublin, hosts around 250-300 exhibitors from Poland, Ukraine and Belarus, Zbereże-Ad- amczuki European Good Neighbor Event with numerous exhibitions and concerts on both sides of the Bug river.

A very important role in the tourist offer of the region is played by the tourism support facilities. There are many cultural establishments located on the territory of the analyzed region: 108 museums, 18 theaters and 101 movie cinemas, and the tourist offer of the border regions is very diverse. Almost half of the theaters and 14 out of 17 music institutions present in the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian border area are located in the Lviv Oblast making it quite exceptional. It must be underlined, however, that although the biggest number of museums was located on the territory of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, it was the Lviv’s museums that attracted, in 2011, the biggest number of visitors (1684.7 thousand persons).

78 79  Institutes o higher education are an important element of the social-economic Fig. 2.20. Accommodations per 1000 inhabitants in 2011. potential of the analyzed cross border region. Two higher education centers are especially important in this respect: Lviv and Lublin, they both have at their disposal a broad educational offer including PhD studies. From the beginning of the 1990s of the XX century institutional cooperation has been developing among institutes of higher learning from the Lubelskie Voivodeship and the border regions of Belarus and Ukraine, assuming, ﬁ rst of all, the form of joint conferences and seminars as well as research projects. An interesting case of the Polish-Ukrainian cooperation in the scope of higher education was the initiative of creating a Polish-Ukrainian University in Lublin, which is certainly worth revisiting. Unfortunately it did not materialize.

 The Polish-Ukrainian border region is rich in tourist attractions including tangible and intangible cultural heritage. Numerous monuments, including those listed by UNESCO36 are an important value that could promote the development of tourism. Additionally, the analyzed cross border area includes vast unpolluted areas with natural and landscape values. The region’s attractiveness from the point of view of the tourist industry is strengthened by the multicultural nature of the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian region that has been shaped through centuries of mutual coexistence of representatives of different nationalities.

 It seems that the tourist traffi c on the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian border region is disproportionate to the tourism potential of the analyzed macroregion. The cross border region’s unexplored tourism potential is mainly due to an insuffi cient tourist-awareness, insuffi cient marketing, lack of attractive tourist products and their promotion, peripheral geographic location and low accessibility from a transport standpoint, low quality of tourist infrastructure, including hotel base as well as capital barrier in the scope of creating attractive tourist products.

It seems that the tourist traffi c in the Polish-Belarusian-Ukrainian border region is disproportionate to the tourism potential of the analyzed macroregion. The causes for the unexplored possibilities of the cross border region in the scope of tourism, despite many positive changes, for many years remain the same and include: an insuffi cient tourist-awareness, insuffi cient marketing, lack of attractive tourist products and their promotion, peripheral geographic location and low accessibility from a transport standpoint (better use of air traffi c may help to break that impasse), low quality of tourist infrastructure, including hotel base as well as capital barrier in the scope of creating attractive tourist products35. In order to improve the situation in this scope it is necessary to develop and improve the quality of the tourist base, increase the transport availability including a better use of air traffi c as well as create attractive tourist products and promote them better nationally and abroad, instead of relaying only on environmental and cultural val- 36 The analyzed cross border region includes 5 items entered into the UNESCO’s ues of particular regions. world heritage list, including: Zamość’s old town in Lubelskie Voivodeship, Białowieska Forest and the Struve Geodetic Arc in the Brest Oblast and, in the Lviv Oblast - historic 35 M. Malska, W. Molas, Turystyka, [in:] B. Kawałko, A. Miszczuk (red.), op. cit., s. center of Lviv and wooden Orthodox churches in the Polish and Ukrainian Karpacki re- 158-159. gion.

80 81 2.2.6 CROSS BORDER COOPERATION POTENTIAL

SUMMARY – SWOT ANALYSIS OF THE CROSS BORDER REGION

82 83 OPPORTUNITIES THREATS . increase of the relevance of European . strengthening the external EU border, Neighboring Policy towards Eastern . increase of transit relevance of com- Europe, peting transport trails, especially in the .2.6 . transit location between Eastern and south of Poland (A 4) and Europe, 2 Western Europe on the crossing of . divergence of the economic level in trans-European road and railroad trails, European dimension and in particular On the basis of the diagnosis and opinions of Belarusian, Ukrainian and . possibility to increase the external countries, Polish experts an evaluation was made of the cross border region devel- transport availability through better use . marked public administration institu- opment level, identifying its strong and weak sides and opportunities and of airport infrastructure, threats (table 2.17). The main assumptions are: tional distance resulting from political . increase of quality and mobility of work- systems and different state models, force, . unfavorable demographic tendencies  strong points result from environmental, social, economic and cultural condi- . the increase of interest in cross border (depopulation, ageing society), tions of the cross border region including phenomena and processes impor- partnership, . crime related to the functioning of the tant for its development which should be continued and supported as a result . increase of activity and growing role external border of the EU. . of the realization of Strategy, of non-governmental organizations in international relations including cross  weak points indicate phenomena and processes caused by the internal sit- border relations. uation of the cross border region, which limit the developmental challenges and which, as a result of the realization of the Strategy, should be mitigated or Source: Own work eliminated,

 opportunities for development are made up of those factors, which due to the conditions and potential development possibilities should be shaped and strengthened by undertaken public intervention within the Strategy, the over- After performing a strategic evaluation, priorities of strategic activities were riding goal of which should be to broaden strong and limiting weak opportuni- identiﬁ ed, which specify the Strategy’s thematic scope. These include: ties for the development of the cross border region.  economic cooperation, understood as creating conditions for external capital  threats for the development include factors which could potentially constitute to invest in the cross border region, developmental barriers, limit or make it impossible to achieve the expected level of development of the cross border region and which should be eliminated  natural environment, culture and tourism, as a result of the realization of the Strategy.  transport and border infrastructure (roads, railway, border crossings),

 science and higher education.

Table 2.17.SWOT analysis of the cross border region A new paradigm included in the EU strategic document: Europa 2020 was taken into consideration when selecting the aforementioned priorities. Strategy STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES towards intelligent and balanced development promoting social inclusion, includ- . signifi cant values of wildlife and nature . low level of socio-economic developing the principle of thematic concentration, connected to the highest possible and relatively low degradation level, ment, effectiveness of cross border cooperation, which helps minimize weaknesses . relatively well preserved multicultural . outdated economic structure (big share and threats and promotes strengths and development opportunities of the cross heritage, of agriculture), border region. Another step was the identifi cation of goals and directions of taking action within particular areas. To maintain coherence, the general goal of the . lack of relevant language barriers, . negligible application of environmental Strategy was formulated fi rst . relatively high level of education of the and cultural potential for the develop- population, ment of tourism (lack of relevant tourist products), . well developed base of higher education, . low level of road infrastructure development, especially in the border region, . good accessibility to research centers, . low development level of road infra- . creating incentives for investors, structure, especially in the border re- . openness of companies, institutions gion, and persons to cross border coopera- . insuffi cient use of those railways which tion, do not require the change of railroad . location of modern airports. width (Broad Gauge Metallurgy Line, Chełm-Kowel, Zamość-Rawa Ruska), . small diversifi cation of border crossings (lack of tourist pedestrian crossings), . unexplored airport potential, . lack of cargo airports. .

84 85 3.3.1 GOALS AND DIRECTIONS OF CROSS BORDER COOPERATION

GENERAL STRATEGY OBJECTIVE

The increase of the socio-economic competitiveness of the cross border area by effective use of endogenous potentials and mitigating the limitations of the functioning of the external EU border.

86 87 3.3.1 The general goal of the strategy was based on the premises of the cross border cooperation strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Volyn Oblast, Lviv Oblast and Brest Oblast for 2014-2020. The factors that were taken into consideration included: the SWOT analysis of the potential of cross border cooperation, identiﬁ cation of areas of strategic action taking and the opinion of Polish, Belarusian and Ukrainian experts. The general goal of the strategy is: 3.3.2 The increase of the socio-economic OALS AND DIRECTIONS competitiveness of the cross border area by effective G use of endogenous potentials and mitigating the OF CROSS BORDER limitations of the functioning of the external EU border. COOPERATION

General goal was narrowed down by formulating goals and directions for four areas of strategic action taking, i.e. economic cooperation, natural environment, culture and tourism, transport and border infrastructure, science and higher OALS AND DIRECTIONS education. G OF COOPERATION WITHIN STRATEGIC ACTIVITIES

88 89 seems that the economic cooperation inside the cross border region is very weak. Apart from such spontaneously emerging examples as cross border trade, there is no infl ow of innovative foreign investment, including capital belonging to the neighboring countries. Obstacles to economic cooperation include: lack of information regarding the search for activity in particular areas of the border region, complex- 3.3.2 ity of provisions, customs barriers, diffi culty in fi nding reliable partners etc. In this situation, to achieve the assumed goal and effect of economic cooperation in the cross border area it is necessary to pursue the following directions: 1.1. SUPPLY OF COMPLETE AND UPDATED INFORMATION ABOUT 3.3.2.1 THE CONDITIONS OF CONDUCTING ACTIVITY AND ECONOMIC ENTITIES OF THE CROSS BORDER AREA, Economic cooperation 1.2. CREATION OF FURTHER INCENTIVES TO CONDUCT ECONOMIC ACTIVITY

The exit point for formulating the domain-goal was to conduct a stra- 1.3. SPECIALIZING THE EXISTING BUSINESS SUPPORT INSTITU- tegic analysis for each domain. For the domain: Economic cooperation re- TIONS TO ENGAGE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH COMPANIES INTER- sults of the SWOT analysis were placed in the 3.1. table. ESTED IN COOPERATION ON THE CROSS BORDER AREA, 1.4. INTEGRATED ECONOMIC PROMOTION OF THE CROSS BORDER AREA. Detailed role in the boosting competitiveness of the cross border area by uti- Table 3.1.SWOT analysis for the domain: Economic cooperation lizing the concentration of the socio-economic potential shall be played by cities, especially the biggest ones that are the seats of regional authorities. STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES Realization of the initiatives shall take place, among other things, by recom- . relatively high level of education among . outdated economic structure, mended projects, the list of which is to be found in annex 1. the population, . insuffi ciently developed high technolo- . well developed higher education base, gy industry, . creating incentives for investors, . dominant mono-functionality of agricul- . openness of companies, institutions tural areas, and persons to the cross-border coop- . relative low educational base of the ru- eration, ral population, . signifi cant amounts of natural resourc- . weakness of business support institu- es, tions in fostering cross border econom- 3.3.2.2 . benefi cial conditions for the develop- ic cooperation. ment of agriculture, Natural environment, . developed network of the business support institutions. OPPORTUNITIES THREATS culture and tourism . seeking new competitive markets by . diversifi ed provisions regarding busi- external capital, ness activity in Belarus, Poland and in . increase of competitiveness of labor by the Ukraine. Cross border cooperation based on protecting and respecting envi- improvement of the educational level . customs barriers, ronmental and cultural values, which may be used for the development of and specialization of people’s educa- . insuffi cient availability of information tourism, is quite popular and can successfully be developed in the West tion, regarding the conducted business ac- European countries. The cross border region has also its potential in this . development of technology transfer in tivity, scope, which, however, is utilized only to a small degree. The SWOT anal- institutes of higher education and crea- . low transport accessibility, ysis for the domain: Natural environment, culture and tourism was placed tion of science-technological parks, . from other (highly developed) regions. in table 3.2. . creation, by the regional and local authorities, of a climate conducive to the development of entrepreneurship, . supporting agricultural transformation.

Source: Own work.

The analysis made it possible to formulate the domain goal i.e. the creation of beneﬁ cial conditions for the development of entrepreneurship and investment for external capital. Improvement of economic competitiveness of the cross border area should be the effect of activities related directly to the aforementioned goal. It

90 91 Table 3.2.SWOT analysis for the domain: Natural environment, culture and tourism

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES The effect of the activities undertaken to achieve . signifi cant values of wildlife and nature . natural threat (fl oods, mudslides, it should be: increasing the tourist attractiveness of and relatively low degradation level, soil erosion), the cross border region in the national and European . integrating potential of the location of . weakly developed network of envi- the most precious physiographic enti- ronmental monitoring, dimension while preserving its biodiversity and ties (Polesie, Roztocze, Bug river ba- . lack of coordinated cross border cultural heritage dimension. sin), crisis management services to tack- . cultural potential based on multicultural le environmental and anthropogenic potential, threats, . cross border location endogenous and . relatively weakly developed and concentration of monuments of cultur- un-diversifi ed tourism infrastruc- al, ture, The cross border area has an important and unique natural and cultural value, . . lack of major language barriers, lack of major cross border tourist there are however no joint activities in order to protect, coordinate and remove . friendly attitude towards tourists (guest products, threats. Tourist infrastructure is weakly developed, it lacks attractiveness and di- friendliness). . diffi cult access to potential tourist versifi cation of tourist products and the accessibility of most tourist destinations products, is diffi cult from the transport standpoint. In this situation, to achieve the assumed . small diversifi cation of border goal and effect of cross border cooperation in the scope of natural environment, crossings, culture and tourism, it is necessary to undertake the following initiatives: . weak availability of tourist information (small number o tourist publica- 2.1. CROSS BORDER COOPERATION IN CRISIS MANAGEMENT AND tion (also in electronic format), small HEALTH PROTECTION SERVICES, number of tourist information points 2.2. CROSS BORDER COOPERATION DEVELOPMENT IN HEALTH and their improper distribution), PROTECTION . unsatisfactory status of historic monuments and urban complexes. 2.3. STIMULATING ACTIVITIES FOR THE CREATION AND COORDINA- TION FOR THE OF CROSS BORDER PROTECTED AREAS,

OPPORTUNITIES THREATS 2.4. STIMULATING CROSS BORDER INITIATIVES AIMED AT MAIN- TAINING WATER QUALITY IN BUG RIVER BASIN, . unique, from the European point of . growing anthropogenic and natural view natural and cultural values, threats for the environment, 2.5. PREPARATION OF CROSS BORDER TOURIST PRODUCTS, . . development of environmental monitor- movement of cross border environmen- 2.6. CROSS BORDER ACTIVITIES AIMED TOWARDS PROTECTING ing system, tal pollution, THE WORLD CULTURAL HERITAGE, . coordinated cross border crisis man- . competition of other tourist area, agement services to tackle environ- . non-tourist reasons for arrival domi- 2.7. SUPPORTING AND COORDINATING CROSS BORDER CULTURAL mental and anthropogenic threats, nate, EVENTS AND SPORT EVENTS, . strengthening social ties and local and . maintenance of visa trafﬁ c, 2.8. CREATING CROSS BORDER COOPERATION NETWORKS INSTI- regional culture by school cooperation, . disappearance of regional and local TUTIONS AND ORGANIZATIONS DEALING WITH NATURAL ENVI- . development of cross border tourist culture. RONMENT, CULTURE, TOURISM AND SPORT, products (regional, local) proper to different forms of tourism, 2.9. PREPARATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A SYSTEM FOR POPU- . creating modern forms of environmen- LARIZING RENEWABLE SOURCES OF ENERGY. tal protection (geoparks), Their implementation shall take place, among other things, through recom- . expansion of spatial development of mended projects, the list of which is to be found in annex 1. the local border trafﬁ c with Belarus and Ukraine.

Source: Own work

On the basis of the SWOT analysis the domain goal was formulated: strengthening of the environmental and cultural potential and its utilization for the development of tourism.

92 93 3.2.3 3. The ultimate result of the activities undertaken to Transport and border achieve this domain goal should be the improvement of the coherent transportation system of the cross infrastructure border region including shorter border crossing time on the Polish-Belarusian and Polish-Ukrainian In the consistent opinion of Polish, Belarusian and Ukrainian experts, border. the low accessibility of the cross border region and its two sections of external EU border, constitutes one of the basic developmental barriers of that area. Table 3.3. presents the SWOT Strategic Analysis for the domain: Transport and border infrastructure

External EU border which is the spatial barrier with a low degree of permeability, both in the physical-technical (border crossing) as well as formal-legal (visa) sense constitutes one of the most important barriers to cross border cooperation. Table 3.3. SWOT Analysis for the domain: Transport and border infrastructure This barrier is not conducive, also to the improvement of accessibility of border area, which are constituent part of the cross border regions. To improve the situa- STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES tion in this scope one needs to take the following initiative directions: . location of modern airports, . ow level of road infrastructure, espe- 3.1. IMPROVEMENT OF THE PERMEABILITY OF THE POLISH-BELA- . development of the existing border cially in the border region, RUSIAN AND POLISH-UKRAINIAN BORDER THROUGH NEW BOR- crossings that ensures their proper . low development level of railway infra- technical level, structure, especially in the border re- DER CROSSINGS AND MODERNIZATION OF ALREADY EXISTING ONES, INCLUDING THE PEDESTRIAN AND TOURIST CROSSINGS, . cross border cooperation of the insti- gion, tutions and organizations related to . insuffi cient use of those railways which 3.2. IMPROVEMENT OF THE ROAD ACCESSIBILITY OF BORDER transport and shipping. do not require the change of railway CROSSINGS, width (Broad Gauge Metallurgy Line, Chełm-Kowel, Zamość-Rawa Ruska), 3.3. INCREASE OF THE NUMBER OF CROSS BORDER TRANSPORT . small and insuffi cient diversifi cation of LINKS, border crossings (lack of tourist pedes- 3.4. IMPROVEMENT OF THE LOCAL BORDER TRAFFIC ZONE, trian crossings), . unexplored airport potential, 3.5. REVITALIZATION OF THE CROSS BORDER RAILWAY INFRA- STRUCTURE, . lack of cargo airports, . lack of a suffi cient number of connec- 3.6. SUPPORTING AIRPORTS TO OPEN NEW CONNECTIONS INCLUD- tions and adequate quality of transport, ING CROSS BORDER CONNECTIONS. including public transport, insuffi cient accessibility, . visa problems. Their implementation shall take place, among other things, through recom- OPPORTUNITIES THREATS mended projects, the list of which is to be found in annex 1. . transit location between Eastern and . strengthening the external EU border, Western Europe on the crossing of . increase of the relevance of transit of trans-European road and railroad trails, competitive transport trails, especially . possibility to increase the external south of Poland (A 4) and Europe, transport availability through better use . increase of cross border crime. of airport infrastructure, . improvement of transport safety and care over victims of accidents, . the possibility to obtain fi nancial support from the EU funds for investments realized within the TEN network.

Source: Own work

On the basis of the SWOT analysis a domain goal was formulated: support for the activities aimed towards the improvement of external and internal accessibility.

94 95 3.2.4 3. The effect of the undertaken actions should Science and higher include the raising of educational standards, internationalization of educational offer and inter- education faculty scientiﬁ c teams.

In a knowledge based economy, the functioning of the institute of higher education and the research institute becomes especially important both in the scope of creating and absorbing innovation as well as creative educa- Cross border scientifi c cooperation and the exchange of students be- tion of staff. Due to the importance of that issue, cross border cooperation long to the most effective and dynamic areas of cross border cooperation. was also included in the new paradigm of regional development included in Its harbingers are already discernible in the cross border region. In order for it to the medium term development strategy EU Europa 2020. Table 3.4. presents happen the implementation of the following directions is necessary: the strategic SWOT analysis for the domain: Science and higher education. 4.1. COMPREHENSIVE APPLICATION OF THE BOLOGNA PROCESS IN ALL INSTITUTIONS OF THE CROSS BORDER REGION, 4.2. APPLICATION OF THE EDUCATIONAL OFFER OF THE UNIVERSI- TY TO THE CHANGING REQUIREMENTS OF KNOWLEDGE BASED Table 3.4. SWOT analysis for the area: Science and higher education ECONOMY, WITH PARTICULAR CONSIDERATION OF THE CROSS BORDER ECONOMY, STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES 4.3. CREATION OF PARTNERSHIPS BETWEEN INSTITUTES OF HIGH- ER EDUCATION IN ORDER TO ABSORB EXTERNAL RESOURCES . lack of relevant language barriers, . selective internationalization of Univer- FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH. . relatively high level of education among sities, the population, . lack of comprehensive adoption of the . well developed higher education base, Bologna Process, Particular role in the improvement of educational standards and international- . good accessibility to research centers. . lack of comprehensive studies offer for foreigners, ization of the didactic offer and scientifi c research in the cross border region, due to the concentration of the scientifi c, educational and research potential, shall be . diversifi ed level of development of sci- played by cities, especially the biggest ones that are the seats of regional author- entifi c infrastructure, ities. . insuffi cient coordination of scientifi c research, Realization of the initiatives shall take place, among other things, through . low level of commercialization of scien- recommended projects, the list of which is to be found in annex 1 tifi c research. OPPORTUNITIES THREATS . possibility to strengthen the bonds of . decreasing number of students, demo- scientifi c cooperation, graphic conditions, . possibility to obtain signifi cant internal . „brain drain”, fi nancial resources from international . competition of prestigious institutes of institutions for scientifi c research, higher education. . comprehensive implementation of the Bologna Process.

Source: Own work

On the basis of the SWOT analysis, the domain goal, which is to build a knowledge based economy through the support of cooperation of institutes of higher education and research institutes in the scope of scientiﬁ c research and didactics.

96 97 Own work on the basis of data of Main Statistical Ofﬁ ce. Statistical Main of data of basis the on work Own Source: objectives strategic of System 2.3. Table order to manage the companies interested interested companies the manage to order conducting business activity activity economicand conducting business 1.4. integrated economic economic integrated 1.4. existing business support institutions in in institutions support business existing in cooperation in the cross border area cross border the in in cooperation 1. Economic cooperation . 1.1 . 1.2 information about about information the of conditions 1.3. supporting the specialization of of specialization the 1.3. supporting entities of the cross border region cross border the of entities - socio the of Increase

supply of complete and updated updated and completeof supply activity conducting business generatingfurther to incentives cross border region cross border support

effective use of potentials the and endogenous mitigating of limitations

for economic competitiveness of the cross border area on the European, national, regional and and levellocal of by competitiveness regional the area border on cross t he economic national, the European, the the

Goals and directionsGoals andcooperation of within strategic activities 2.6. cross borderactivitiesat aimed protecting . 2.2 2.7. cross and supporting coordinating border 2.3. stimulating actionsat aimedcreating and 2.4. stimulating cross border actions geared actions bordercross2.4. stimulating cooperation and organizations dealing with with dealing organizations and cooperation toward protecting water theofquality Bug natural environment, culture, tourism and environment, natural coordinating cross areas border protected coordinating system popularizing renewable sources sources of renewable system popularizing 2.9. preparation and of implementation a 2.5. preparation of cross border tourist tourist border cross of preparation 2.5.

2.8. creating cross border networks of of networks border cross 2.8. creating . 2.1 development of of cross border cooperation development care health in services management 2. Natural2. environment,

cross border cooperation of crisis crisis of cooperation cross border 4. culture and tourism tourism and culture the world cultural heritage cultural the world cultural and sport events and cultural

in health care health in MPLEMENTATION river basin river

products I energy sport

General goalthe of Strategy

SYSTEM Strategic actiondomains

3.4. the broadening local border traffic zone 3.2. improvement of road accessibility of border of 3.2. accessibility road of improvement existing crossingsexisting forborder crossings, including connections including crossconnections including border connections - border Polish and Belarusian 3.1. increasing the permeability of the Polish the of permeability the 3.1. increasing 3.3. increase of the number of crossborder of number the of 3.3. increase by new and alreadyopening modernizing 3.5. revitalizing the cross border railroad railroad border cross the revitalizing 3.5. 3.6. supporting airports in opening new3.6. airports opening in supporting 3. Transport border and pedestrians and tourist crossings.tourist and pedestrians infrastructure transport connections infrastructure crossings

Ukrainian border border Ukrainian

external

EU border. institutes of higher education to the changing the changing to education higher institutes of economy with special consideration of cross of consideration special with economy 4.3. creating inter4.3. creating 4.1. popularizing the Bologna Process in all Processall in 4.1.the Bologna popularizing order to the resources for absorb external requirements of the knowledge based based knowledge the of requirements 4.2. adjustingoffer theof educational universities of the the of cross area border universities

4. Science and higher higher and 4. Science border economy education research - university partnerships university in

Implementation system of Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014-2020 should be based on the multi – level governance model.

98 4. The system of entities engaged in its realization includes four basic sectors:

 public sector (government administration, self-governments),

 private sector (business entities),

 social sector (non-governmental organizations),

 research and development sector (institutes of higher education, research institutes). 5. Each of those has at its disposition different instruments suited for issues that it tackles with and the way it works. The institutional-coordinating back ofﬁ ce of SOURCES OF FINANCING the Strategy implementing system should be created by:

 The Programme council consisting of 8 persons representing regional authorities, four administrative units of the cross border region (Brest Oblast, Lviv Oblast, Volyn Oblast and the Lubelskie Voivodeship),

 The Managing Team consisting of 8 persons (2 from the Brest Oblast, Lviv Oblast, Volyn Oblast and Lubelskie Voivodeship).

The tasks of the Programme Council include: taking most relevant decisions related to the Strategy, evaluating its realization and identifying necessary updates. The manner of selecting the members of the Council shall be established by each of the parties.

The task of the Managing Team is to monitor the Strategy and provide information to the Council. The manner of selecting the Team members shall be established by each of the parties.

The Strategy implementation process shall take place on the basis of an annual planning of activities that take into consideration the goal-driven conditions, results of budgetary planning and managerial control.

100 101 5. Source of ﬁ nancing of Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubel- skie Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblast for 2014-2020 include all available ﬁ nancial resources which may be engaged in order to implement the developmental activities i.e:

1. National public funds such as:

 state budget,

 budget of state special funds,  the budget of other state entities of the public ﬁ nance sector, 6.  budget of local self-government units. MONITORING SYSTEM 2. Foreign public funds:

 resources from the EU budget within the European Territorial Cooperation, especially the Poland-Belarus Cross Border Cooperation Programme 2014- 2020,

 European structural funds (ERDF, ESF) and Cohesion Fund directed to the realization of the coherence policy,

 resources coming from the loans of international ﬁ nancial institutions,

 other European resources including:

 Norwegian Financial Mechanism,

 European Economic Area Financial Mechanism,

 Swiss Contribution Programme,

 other extra European resources (including USAID).

3. Private resources, co-ﬁ nancing the projects within the private-public partnership system.

102 6. Monitoring of Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014-2020 should be based on the system of indicators, products and results - agreed by Polish, Bela- rusian and Ukrainian experts - included in table 6.1.

Table 6.1. System of indicators monitoring the products and results

Domains (priorities) Indicators Economic cooperation number of companies, including foreign capital per 10 thousand inhabitants, 7. value of the export of particular parts of cross border region in USD in general and per capital, WORKING ON THE investment per capita, GDP value per capita, Natural environment, culture Bug river water quality indicators (on the basis of the STRATEGY and tourism functioning monitoring system), dust and gas pollution per 1km2, number of tourist and provided accommodations, Transport and border infra- waiting time to cross the border in a number of border structure crossings, average travel time between Lublin and Brest, Lublin and Łuck and Lublin and Lviv, number of regular cross border bus, railway and air trafﬁ c connections, average arrival time to Brest, Łuck, Lviv and Lublin from selected European cities, Science and higher educa- number of students on technical departments, tion share of foreigners in the general number of students, number o students participating in the Erasums + programme on the area of the cross border region, number of international research teams.

Source: Own work.

In the summer of 2012 the self-government of the Lubelskie Voivodeship initiated work on the document entitled: “Cross Border Cooperation Strategy of the Lubelskie Voivodeship, Lviv, Volyn and Brest Oblasts for 2014 – 2020”.

104  applications were considered during social consultations.

According to the accepted scope and schedule of work, the conference that was held in November 2013 was an important element of the whole process. The goal of the conference was to prepare a summary of the work conducted in the pe- 7. riod of January-November 2013 and the public presentation of the Strategy project The initiation of the work over this document was presented and ac- as well as presentation of other activities, including starting social consultations. cepted during the meeting of the Euroregion Bug Cross Border Council in Brest on 26 November 2012. Between 10 December 2013 and 24 January 2014, social consultations were held in each partner region. In the Lubelskie Voivodeship consultation meetings were organized in three cities (Hrubieszów, Włodawa, Biała Podlaska) and it was Project of the Strategy was developed within the Joint Working Group. The made possible to voice concerns through the form available on the Internet web- members of the group included the representatives of the Lubelskie Voivode- site. Social consultations were held also in Łuck, Lviv and Brest. Having consid- ship and coordinators appointed by appropriate authorities from partner regions ered all the remarks and applications submitted during social consultations, the (Volyn, Lviv and Brest Oblasts). The entire time, the Group beneﬁ ts from the sup- ﬁ nal version of the Strategy’s blueprint was prepared on 4 March 2014 during the port of an external expert. VI meeting of the Joint Working Group.

The meetings of the group, apart from the coordinators, were also attended by representatives of administration and partner organizations. Their participation was related to the topic and scope of particular meetings: Cooperation of four regions was intensifi ed thanks to new fi nancial support coming from external funds. Marshal Offi ce of the Lubelskie Voivodeship took part in the competition “Support of the citizen and self-government dimension of Polish  Lviv Oblast State Administration: Lew Zacharczyszyn foreign policy 2013”, announced by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Poland.  Lviv Oblast Council: Iwanna Kaczmaryk, Orest Shejka, Olga Pavlyshyn Project submitted by entitles of the Marshal Offi ce of the Lubelskie Voivode-  Scientifi c – Technical Information Center: Igor Lazorko ship. “Building partnerships for the development of the Cross-Border Strategy for 2014-2020” was submitted to obtain co-fi nancing.  Volyn Oblast State Administration: Claudia Królik, Anna Hreczanowska The amount of the subsidy from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs amounted to 109 220.00 PLN,  Brest Oblast Executive Committee: Andriej Klest, Jurij Dmitrichkov while the total cost of the project was estimated at 138 269.60 PLN. On the Ministry of Foreign Af-  Brest Cross Border Infocenter: Wladimir Teleżynski, Yaroslav Luksha, Katari- fairs’ side the project was supervised by Agata na Kosykh Czyrsznic – Dobrowolska, the Head of the Self-government and Citizenship Dimension of “Building partnerships for the develop-  Spatial Planning Offi ce in Lublin: Henryk Szych, Waldemar Rudnicki - Elżbi- Polish Foreign Policy. ment of the Cross-Border Strategy for 2014 – eta Zalewska, Ewelina Rejmak, Justyna Gorczyca, Marcin Kowalski, Dariusz Brzozowski, Jolanta Drzas The project lasted from June to November 2020” 2013 and the obtained funding made it possible to  Cross Border Association Euroregion BUG Secretariat: Galina Grabarczuk organize meetings of the Joint Woking Group more often. This allowed the provisions of the Strategy  European Meeting Centre - Nowy Staw Foundation: Andrzej Skórski, Bartłomiej to be the fruit of actual, honest, partnership-based cooperation of the four regions. Martys The meetings of the Joint Working Group were attended by observers from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  Marshal Offi ce of the Lubelskie Voivodeship: Małgorzata Błaszczyk – Osik, Anna Łukasiak

Working Group worked from March 2013 to March 2014. In that time, six meetings took place during which:

 details of the strategy concept were prepared (among other things: function of the document, work methodology);

 the diagnosis of the cross border area was presented and a discussion was conducted with regard to its results;

 SWOT analysis was prepared, general goal, detailed goals as well as directions of action taking within four domains of strategic action;

 social consultation procedures were agreed upon as well as the manner of taking over the Strategies in particular regions, according to the mandatory competencies;

106 107 8. ANNEX

108 Annex 1 a water treatment plant on the territory of the Szacki National Park.

Transport and border infrastructure

List of the submitted  Building of a second bridge on Bug on the international road border crossing “Uściług-Zosin”. recommended projects  Construction of new international border crossings “Kryłów-Krecziw”, “Gródek-Ambuków”, “Zbereże-Adamczuki” on the Polish-Ukrainian national border.

Economic cooperation  Restoration of the direct railway connection between Chełm and Kowel Main- tenance railway work on the distance of 65 km.

 Preparation of an Internet website about cross border cooperation along with  Modernization of the N22 route on the Uściług-Łuck section, along with the offers of interested entities. the network of ring roads on the territory of the following towns: Uściług, Włodzimierz-Wołyński, Łuck with the length of around 100 km.  Creation of a training-consultancy network in the scope of cross border cooperation on the basis of the existing business support institutions.  Building and modernization of a network of access roads to new international road border crossings “Kryłów-Krecziw”, “Gródek-Ambuków”, “Zbereże-Ad-  Development of science-technological parks. amczuki”.

 Development of logistics centers.  Creation of a fast railway connection Lwów – Lublin – Zamość – Warszawa.

 Construction of a bridge on the Bug border river on the Terespol-Brest border crossing. Natural environment, culture and tourism  Extension of the voivodeship road number 812 Biała Podlaska – Wisznice – Włodawa - Chełm of the total length of around 38 km.  Building of a sewage system and waste processing plants in rural areas within the Szacki National Park.  Extension of the voivodeship road number 811 Sarnaki – Konstantynów – Biała Podlaska on the section of the total length of around 22km.  Institutional strengthening of the “Polesie Zachodnie” biosphere reserve.  Extension of the voivodeship road number 844 Chełm – Hrubieszów – Wit-  Improvement of the ecological situation in the Bug river basin and the tourist ków – Dołhobyczów – state border on the section of total length of around 26 attractive area. km.

 Preparation of the programme for cross border cooperation of crisis manage-  Building of the river railway bridge on Bug in Orchówek near Włodawa and the ment services. construction of broad gauge railway line Orchówek near Włodawa – Zawada, through Chełm, Rejowiec Fabryczny and Krasnystaw”.  Improvement of safety of inhabitants of border regions of the south-west Brest Oblast and the Bialski Poviat through the development of infrastructure.  Modernization of railway lines on the Ukrainian - Polish border, through the modernization of railway lines on the section of 65 km and revitalization of the  Supporting the development of the system of mutual notiﬁ cation of emergen- direct railway connection between Kowle and Chełm. cy services in the border area between Poland and Belarus through, inter alia, the creation of crisis management centers.

 Strengthening of the Polish-Ukrainian cooperation towards preservation and protection of cultural heritage. Science and higher education  creating an interactive map of tourist trails (footpaths, bicycles, car, water and horse trails).  Cross border cooperation with universities and research institutes in order to  Preparation and prolonging a twin project “Zamość-Żółkiew - renaissance promote the region. town of new challenges and possibilities”.  Cooperation with educational facilities located in the cross border area.  Creating the Roztocze Cross Border Biosphere Reserve.  Preparation of student exchange programmes.  Promotion of nature – culture values on the territory of the “Polesie Zachod- nie” Cross Border Biosphere Reserve.

 Improvement of the ecological situation by constructing a sewage system and

110 111 Statistical Annex Tabl. 2. GDP growth.

Lubelskie List Brest Oblast Lviv Oblast Volyn Oblast Voivodeship Economy 2004 102,4 : 105,2 119,0 Tabl. 1. Gross domestic product (in ﬁ xed prices) 2005 102,0 : 98,1 103,7

List 2006 104,8 : 108,3 103,5 a - in millions in national 2007 105,4 : 105,8 112,1 currencies* Lubelskie Brest Volyn Lviv Oblast 2008 106,5 : 100,7 106,1 b – in million American Voivodeship Oblast Oblast dollars (USD)** 2009 99,3 100,6 88,3 86,0 c – in million euro (EUR)*** 2010 103,8 111,3 102,3 100,2 2003 a 34 414 : : : Tabl. 3. The structure of creating gross added value according to economic sectors.. b 8 847 : : : Agriculture, c 7 881 : : : Total forestry, Industry Construction Services 2004 hunting a 36 730 : 13 992 4 994 List and fi shery b 10 036 : 2 630 937 In national currencies* % c 8 047 : 2 126 759 (in millions) 2005 Lubelskie Voivodeship a 38 487 : 17 192 6 553 2003 30381 100,0 8,0 18,5 5,8 67,8 b 11 879 : 3 358 1 232 2004 32642 100,0 8,4 19,9 5,7 66,0 c 9 512 : 2 667 1 017 2005 33908 100,0 7,5 19,4 6,0 67,2 2006 2006 35892 100,0 7,0 19,5 6,3 67,2 a 40 858 : 21 486 7 687 2007 39809 100,0 7,8 19,4 6,8 66,0 b 13 180 : 4 255 1 501 2008 44028 100,0 6,6 19,9 7,5 66,0 c 10 466 : 3 417 1 222 2009 45449 100,0 6,5 19,7 7,7 66,1 2007 2010 47598 100,0 7,4 19,0 7,7 66,0 a 45 504 : 27 987 10 072 Brest Oblast b 16 427 : 5 542 1 994 2003 : : : : : : c 11 964 : 4 064 1 462 2004 : : : : : : 2008 2005 : : : : : : a 50 297 12 494 763 35 534 12 784 2006 : : : : : : b 20 870 5 849 6 743 2 531 2007 : : : : : : c 14 454 3 971 4 745 1 707 2008 12097579 100,0 15,9 31,1 12,1 40,9 2009 2009 13677566 100,0 14,6 30,5 13,6 41,2 a 51 142 14 054 143 35 955 12 225 2010 16822327 100,0 15,9 28,2 14,6 41,2 b 16 392 5 032 4 616 2 320 Brest Oblast c 11 745 3 678 3 307 1 125 2003 10547 100,0 16,7 20,7 5,1 57,4 2010 2004 12893 100,0 15,6 20,5 5,4 58,5 a 54 042 17 178 547 41 655 14 429 2005 15571 100,0 14,0 22,3 4,5 59,3 b 17 895 5 768 5 246 1 852 2006 19336 100,0 11,6 22,9 5,1 60,4 c 13 462 4 346 3 949 1 368 2007 25619 100,0 10,4 23,2 6,1 60,4 * Poland – złoty, Belarus – Belarusian rubel, Ukraine – hrywna; ** Offi cial dollar exchange rate 2008 32436 100,0 10,1 21,2 4,7 63,9 according to World Bank; *** Offi cial course of euro according to World Bank. 2009 33576 100,0 9,3 19,0 3,7 68,0 2010 38766 100,0 9,6 17,4 4,0 69,0

112 113 Agriculture, List 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total forestry, Industry Construction Services hunting Lviv Oblast: List and fi shery export 440,7 512,3 496,3 645,1 759,3 673,4 570,4 732,9 858,0 In national out of which: currencies* % to Poland 52.9 51,5 39,2 61,6 94,7 79,8 90,5 132,0 163,5 (in millions) to Belarus 4.1 6,7 14,2 27,1 33,9 43,6 23,4 37,2 40,6 Volyn Oblast import 2634,7 911,5 744,8 896,8 1079,3 1734,9 1165,6 1525,8 2285,9 2003 3512 100,0 27,5 14,4 4,6 53,5 out of which: 2004 4652 100,0 22,4 13,4 5,0 59,1 from Poland 117.0 112,5 169,7 213,2 260,0 493,9 366,7 457,8 462,5 2005 5984 100,0 20,4 15,8 4,8 58,9 from Belarus 15.2 23,5 11,1 17,7 31,5 154,8 138,5 182,0 639,2 2006 6952 100,0 17,0 18,7 5,9 58,5 balance -2194.1 -399,2 -248,5 -251,7 -320,0 -1061,5 -595,2 -792,9 -1428,0 2007 9264 100,0 14,7 23,4 5,5 56,5 out of which: 2008 11743 100,0 14,9 19,2 3,9 62,1 with Poland -64,1 -61,0 -130,5 -151,6 -165,3 -414,1 -276,2 -325,8 -299,0 2009 11583 100,0 15,2 14,0 2,3 68,6 with Belarus -11,1 -16,8 3,1 9,5 2,4 -111,2 -115,1 -144,7 -598,6 2010 13579 100,0 16,9 15,6 3,2 64,3 * Poland – Polish złoty , Belarus – Belarusian rubel, Ukraine – hrywna. Volyn Oblast export 183,2 220,9 224,0 269,6 309,4 313,6 229,2 327,1 461,4 Tabl. 4.Foreign trade (in million euro) out of which: to Poland 15.8 17,2 22,8 24,5 31,3 28,1 26,3 33,3 32,5 List 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 to Belarus 1.6 3,7 5,2 12,6 10,7 15,2 9,5 12,9 15,1 Woj. lubelskie: import 423,3 536,5 531,4 523,7 773,1 881,9 307,3 429,9 756,4 export 974,2 1026,0 : 1406,4 1614,3 1812,5 1403,0 1726,0 2141,7 out of which: out of which: from Poland 28.2 34,0 50,4 58,9 66,6 111,7 65,7 100,0 95,4 to Belarus : 41,8 : : 45,4 53,8 : : : from Belarus 12.8 17,6 63,9 32,7 18,8 20,4 18,8 28,7 76,3 to Ukraine 129,4 86,0 : : 147,4 186,7 : : : balance -240.0 -315,6 -307,3 -254,1 -463,7 -568,3 -78,1 -102,8 -295,0 importt 603,3 596,0 : 871,3 1133,2 1488,0 1011,0 1290,5 1645,6 out of which: out of which: with Poland -12.4 -16,8 -27,6 -34,4 -35,4 -83,7 -39,4 -66,6 -63,0 from Belarus : 15,9 : : : 44,3 : : : with Belarus -11.2 -13,9 -58,7 -20,1 -8,1 -5,2 -9,3 -15,8 -61,2 from Ukraine 38,6 41,1 : : : 34,1 : : : Source: Own work on the basis of the data of Statistical Offi ce in Lublin, Main Statistical Offi ce of the balance 370,9 430,0 : 535,1 481,1 324,5 392,0 435,5 496,1 Brest Oblast, Main Statistical Offi ce of the Lviv Oblast and the Main Statistical Offi ce in the Volyn Oblast. out of which: Data for the Lubelskie Voivodeship after: K. Gawlikowska-Hueckel, S. Umiński, Handel zagraniczny województwa lubelskiego, (Foreign trade of the Lubelskie Voivodeship [in:] P. Ciżkowicz, P. Opala (red.), with Belarus 25,9 : : : 9,5 : : : Uwarunkowania krajowej i międzynarodowej konkurencyjności województwa lubelskiego (National and International Competitiveness of Lubelskie Voivodeship), Warszawa 2011; Handel zagraniczny w Polsce with Ukraine 90.8 44,9 : : : 152,6 : : : i Małopolsce w 2011 r. (Foreign trade in Poland and Małopolska in 2011), Małopolskie Obserwatorium Brest Oblast Gospodarki, Kraków 2012. Offi cial exchange rate of national currencies in relation to euro according to the European Commission, (http://ec.europa.eu/budget/contracts_grants/info_contracts/inforeuro/ export 603,5 729,0 786,3 905,0 960,1 1105,9 883,3 1193,8 1396,6 inforeuro_en.cfm (accessed: 22 August, 2013).

out of which: Tabl. 5. Foreign Direct Investment (in million euro*). to Poland 9.9 29,9 46,3 46,6 22,5 47,0 16,9 18,6 20,0 to Ukraine 24.8 27,2 41,3 56,4 58,0 77,2 55,1 80,6 82,7 List 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 import 598,5 671,0 671,0 841,2 856,1 1130,2 924,7 1214,8 1387,3 out of which: Lubelskie : : : : 221 98 138 74 : Voivodeship** from Poland 84.2 99,0 116,3 136,5 123,1 150,2 103,4 160,6 217,9 Brest Oblast 62 55 51 59 69 131 67 115 154 from Ukraine 24.8 27,2 41,3 56,4 58,0 77,2 55,1 80,6 82,7 balance 5.0 58,0 115,3 63,8 104,0 -24,3 -41,5 -21,0 9,3 Lviv Oblast : 51 39 73 276 234 158 87 110 out of which: Volyn Oblast : 9 5 16 94 24 42 14 21 with Poland -74.3 -69,2 -69,9 -89,9 -100,6 -103,2 -86,5 -142,0 -197,9 with Ukraine -4.3 -0,2 13,6 -2,5 5,3 1,3 -11,9 -21,9 -14,8 * Ofﬁ cial exchange rate of national currencies in relation to Euro according to the European Commission, (http://ec.europa.eu/budget/contracts _grants/info_contracts/inforeuro/inforeuro_en.cfm (accessed: 22 August, 2013).

** Data for the Lubelskie Voivodeship: estimate of GDP per capita and foreign direct investment in voivodeships as well as leading indicators describing the economic situation. Expert evaluation study performed at the request of the Ministry of Regional Development, BIEC, Warszawa 2011.

114 115 Environment and environmental protection Population and work resources

Tabl. 6. Municipal and industrial wastewater Tabl. 9. Polulation according to voivodeships and oblasts.

List 2003 2011 Including Popula- Popula- Urban- Lubelskie Voivodeship 114,2 80,8 tion women List men tion per ization (in thou- (in thou- total 100 km2 indicator Brest Oblast 70,9 69,5 sands) per 100 sands) (in thou- men Lviv Oblast 255,5 207,7 sands) Lubelskie Voivodeship Volyn Oblast 34,7 44,2 2003 2191,2 1064,5 1126,6 106 87 46,6

Tabl. 7. Municipal and industrial wastewater 2004 2185,2 1061,3 1123,9 106 87 46,7 2005 2179,6 1058,0 1121,6 106 87 46,7 Emission of industrial pollution in Emission of industrial 2006 2172,8 1053,8 1119,0 106 86 46,6 List total (in thousand tonnes) pollution per 1 km2 (in t/r) 2007 2166,2 1050,0 1116,2 106 86 46,6 dust gas dust gas 2008 2161,8 1047,0 1114,8 106 86 46,5 Lubelskie Voivodeship 2009 2157,2 1044,6 1112,6 107 86 46,5 2003 6,9 37,2 0,3 1,5 2010 2178,6 1056,4 1122,3 106 87 46,5

2011 2,4 33,8 0,1 1,3 2011 2171,9 1053,0 1118,9 106 86 46,5 Brest Oblast Brest Oblast 2003 1450,2 682,5 767,7 112 44 62,4 2003 6,9 22,5 0,2 0,7 2004 1439,3 676,7 762,6 113 44 62,7 2011 4,7 22,4 0,1 0,7 2005 1439,3 670,0 756,8 113 44 63,1 2006 1426,8 665,0 752,8 113 44 63,5 Lviv Oblast 2007 1417,8 660,7 749,0 113 43 64,5 2003 18,3 164,5 0,8 7,5 2008 1404,5 657,8 746,7 114 43 65,0 2011 13,6 242,8 0,6 11,1 2009 1399,2 655,3 743,9 114 43 65,7 Volyn Oblast 2010 1394,8 653,5 741,3 113 43 66,5 2011 1391,4 652,1 739,3 113 42 67,2 2003 1,3 5,3 0,1 0,3 Lviv Oblast 2011 0,9 – 0,0 – 2003 2598,3 1222,0 1358,0 111 119 59,7 2004 2588,0 1216,5 1353,2 111 119 59,9 Tabl. 8. Sewage system 2005 2577,1 1210,8 1348,0 111 118 60,1 Length of the sewage system in km 2006 2568,4 1205,8 1344,3 111 118 60,3 List 2003 2011 2007 2559,8 1201,1 1340,4 112 117 60,5 2008 2552,9 1197,4 1337,2 112 117 60,6 Lubelskie Voivodeship 2953,4 4853,6 2009 2549,6 1196,2 1335,0 112 117 60,7 Brest Oblast 950.5 953,5* 2010 2544,7 1194,2 1332,2 112 117 60,8 Lviv Oblast 1771,3 1921,4 2011 2540,9 1193,0 1329,6 111 117 60,8 Volyn Oblast 638.3 670,3 Volyn Oblast 2003 1048,8 492,0 554,1 113 52 50,2 * data for 2009r. 2004 1044,8 489,8 552,2 113 52 50,4 2005 1040,4 487,2 550,5 113 52 50,7 2006 1038,0 485,9 549,4 113 52 50,9 2007 1036,4 485,0 548,7 113 52 51,2 2008 1036,2 484,8 548,7 113 52 51,4 2009 1036,7 485,2 548,7 113 52 51,6 2010 1037,1 485,9 548,5 113 52 51,8 2011 1038,6 487,1 548,8 113 52 51,9

116 117 Tabl. 10. Population according to poviats and regions. Population (in thousands) Popula- Urban tion population List Population (in thousands) Popula- Urban per 1 (in % of general tion population total men women List km2 population) per 1 (in % of general total men women km2 population) Opolski 62.6 30,6 32,0 77 30,1

Lubelskie Voivodeship Parczewski 36.3 18,0 18,4 38 30,2 2003 Puławski 117.0 56,3 60,7 125 48,3 Total 2191,2 1064,5 1126,6 87 46,6 Radzyński 61.3 30,6 30,7 63 26,4 poviats: Rycki 58.8 29,3 29,5 96 46,8 Bialski 115.1 56,9 58,2 42 20,2 Świdnicki 73.3 35,4 38,0 157 59,1 Biłgorajski 104.9 51,8 53,1 62 32,6 Tomaszowski 88.0 43,4 44,6 59 28,2 Chełmski 74.3 36,7 37,5 39 6,2 Włodawski 39.9 19,8 20,2 32 34,5 Hrubieszowski 70.1 34,5 35,6 55 26,7 Zamojski 109.7 54,0 55,7 59 10,7 Janowski 48.4 24,1 24,3 55 24,5 towns/cities with poviat rights Krasnostawski 77.4 37,5 39,9 75 25,4 Biała Podl. 58.0 27,9 30,1 1184 100,0 Kraśnicki 100.6 49,2 51,4 100 38,8 Chełm 66.2 31,1 35,0 1891 100,0 Lubartowski 91.3 44,8 46,5 71 31,6 Lublin 348.6 160,5 188,1 2371 100,0 Lubelski 137.7 67,6 70,1 82 9,0 Zamość 65.8 31,1 34,7 2193 100,0 Łęczyński 57.2 28,2 28,9 90 38,3 Brest Oblast Łukowski 109.1 54,3 54,7 78 30,7 2003 Opolski 63.6 31,1 32,5 79 29,9 Total 1444,74 679,6 765,1 44 62,4 Parczewski 37.1 18,3 18,8 39 27,9 districts: Puławski 117.6 56,7 60,9 126 49,5 Baranowicki 45,6 21,2 24,5 21 5,3 Radzyński 62.0 30,9 31,1 64 26,0 Berezowski 71,1 33,9 37,2 51 59,8 Rycki 60.8 30,4 30,4 99 47,6 Brzeski 44,9 21,4 23,5 28 3,0 Świdnicki 72.6 35,2 37,4 155 59,1 Drohiczyński 47,6 22,2 25,4 26 35,0 Tomaszowski 89.9 44,4 45,5 60 25,2 Hancewicki 34,3 16,5 17,8 20 41,6 Włodawski 40.6 20,1 20,6 32 33,6 Iwacewicki 64,9 32,7 32,2 22 46,0 Zamojski 111.3 54,8 56,5 60 10,5 Janowski 47,9 22,4 25,5 31 33,3 towns/cities with poviat rights Kamieniecki 42,0 19,6 22,3 25 33,7 Biała Podl. 57.8 28,0 29,9 1180 100,0 Kobryński 90,2 42,3 47,9 44 56,2 Chełm 68.7 32,6 36,1 1963 100,0 Lachowicki 33,8 15,9 17,9 25 32,9 Lublin 356.6 164,9 191,7 2426 100,0 Łuniniecki 76,9 37,2 39,7 29 47,5 Zamość 66.7 31,7 35,0 2223 100,0 Małorycki 27,7 13,2 14,5 20 41,8 2011 Piński 57,6 27,1 30,6 18 4,6 Total 2171,9 1053,0 1118,9 86 46,5 Prużański 59,3 27,7 31,6 21 42,2 poviats: Stolinecki 85,7 41,4 44,4 26 30,2 Bialski 114.1 56,5 57,5 41 20,3 Żabinecki 25,3 11,8 13,5 37 50,6 Biłgorajski 103.7 51,1 52,6 62 33,5 towns/cities with poviat rights Chełmski 80.2 39,6 40,6 42 5,7 Baranowicze 167,0 77,4 89,6 3040 100,0 Hrubieszowski 68.2 33,5 34,7 54 27,6 Brześć 293,3 134,9 158,4 3959 100,0 Janowski 47.7 23,6 24,1 55 25,5 Pińsk 129,4 60,8 68,5 3085 100,0 Krasnostawski 67.4 32,7 34,7 65 29,2 2011 Kraśnicki 99.8 48,6 51,0 99 39,1 Total 1391,4 652,1 739,3 42 67,2 Lubartowski 90.5 44,3 46,2 70 31,4 poviats: Lubelski 147.5 72,1 75,3 88 8,3 Baranowicki 40,2 18,8 21,4 18 5,4 Łęczyński 57.7 28,3 29,3 91 35,5 Berezowski 65,4 31,2 34,2 46 63,9 Łukowski 109.9 54,7 55,2 79 30,7 Brzeski 39,5 19,0 20,5 26 3,2

118 119 Population (in thousands) Popula- Urban Population (in thousands) Popula- Urban tion population tion population List List per 1 (in % of general per 1 (in % of general total men women km2 population) total men women km2 population)

Drohiczyński 40,6 18,9 21,7 22 39,8 Lwów 751,1 353,7 397,4 4438 100,0 Hancewicki 29,9 14,5 15,4 17 46,5 Morszyn 4,9 2,2 2,7 3194 100,0 Iwacewicki 57,6 29,0 28,6 19 50,9 Nowy Rozdól 27,7 12,9 14,7 1245 100,0 Janowski 42,0 19,8 22,2 27 39,0 Sambor 35,5 16,7 18,9 2388 100,0 Kamieniecki 37,6 17,8 19,8 22 36,6 Stryj 61,3 29,4 31,9 3629 100,0 Kobryński 86,7 40,6 46,1 42 59,7 Truskawiec 22,0 10,5 11,6 3822 100,0 Lachowicki 28,7 13,5 15,2 21 38,0 Czerwonogród 84,2 39,5 44,7 4019 100,0 Łuniniecki 71,1 34,4 36,7 26 51,9 2011 Małorycki 25,0 11,9 13,1 18 46,7 Total 2522,6 1192,9 1329,6 116 60,3 Piński 49,3 23,2 26,1 15 4,4 districts: Prużański 50,4 23,7 26,7 18 47,1 Brodzki 60,5 28,5 32,0 52 42,7 Stolinecki 77,6 37,7 39,9 23 32,1 Buski 46,5 21,7 24,8 55 34,7 Żabinecki 24,8 11,5 13,3 36 53,4 Drohobycki 74,6 35,5 39,1 62 8,5 towns/cities with poviat rights Gródecki 69,2 32,3 36,9 95 34,9 Baranowicze 169,9 76,8 93,1 3383 100,0 Jaworowski 123,5 60,7 62,9 80 46,0 Brześć 320,9 147,6 173,3 2209 100,0 Kamionecki 57,4 27,2 30,3 66 40,0 Pińsk 134,2 62,2 72,0 2832 100,0 Mościski 57,5 27,2 30,2 68 27,0 Lviv Oblast Mikołajowski 63,1 30,4 32,7 93 27,8 2003 Przemyslański 40,2 18,7 21,5 44 26,4 Total 2579,9 1222,0 1358,0 119 59,7 Pustomycki 113,0 53,6 59,4 119 13,0 districts: Radziechowski 48,6 23,0 25,6 42 26,2 Brodzki 63,2 29,7 33,5 54 40,7 Samborski 69,6 33,0 36,7 75 16,2 Buski 49,7 23,1 26,5 58 33,5 Skolski 47,5 22,9 24,6 32 26,7 Drohobycki 75,7 35,9 39,9 63 8,2 Sokalski 93,7 44,7 49,0 60 37,0 Gródecki 72,3 33,8 38,5 100 33,4 Starosamborski 78,2 37,6 40,6 63 22,7 Jaworowski 122,8 60,1 62,7 80 44,4 Stryjski 62,2 29,6 32,6 77 3,8 Kamionecki 60,7 28,7 32,1 70 39,1 Turczański 50,5 25,1 25,4 42 16,6 Mościski 60,6 28,4 32,1 72 25,7 Złoczowski 70,2 33,3 36,8 64 40,7 Mikołajowski 65,4 31,7 33,7 95 26,9 Żółkiewski 109,7 53,2 56,5 85 35,0 Przemyslański 45,8 21,2 24,6 50 24,4 Żydaczowski 71,5 33,5 38,1 72 41,3 Pustomycki 111,0 52,6 58,4 117 13,6 towns/cities with poviat rights Radziechowski 51,7 24,5 27,2 45 24,7 Borysław 37,5 17,1 20,4 986 100,0 Samborski 73,2 34,5 38,8 78 14,8 Drohobycz 96,0 44,8 51,1 2133 100,0 Skolski 49,0 23,6 25,4 33 26,8 Lwów 750,3 350,9 399,4 4388 100,0 Sokalski 96,7 46,0 50,7 62 35,6 Morszyn 4,5 2,0 2,5 2275 100,0 Starosamborski 80,8 38,7 42,1 65 22,4 Nowy Rozdól 29,0 13,6 15,5 1320 100,0 Stryjski 62,8 29,8 33,1 78 3,7 Sambor 34,7 16,1 18,5 2313 100,0 Turczański 53,6 26,5 27,0 45 17,1 Stryj 59,8 28,5 31,3 3517 100,0 Złoczowski 73,4 34,5 38,8 67 38,5 Truskawiec 21,1 10,0 11,1 2637 100,0 Żółkiewski 108,7 52,4 56,3 84 33,3 Czerwonogród 82,5 38,3 44,2 3929 100,0 Żydaczowski 78,9 36,7 42,1 79 39,5 towns/cities with district rights Borysław 40,0 18,4 21,5 1043 100,0 Drohobycz 97,4 46,2 51,2 2212 100,0

120 121 Population (in thousands) Popula- Urban Population (in thousands) Popula- Urban tion population tion population List List per 1 (in % of general per 1 (in % of general total men women km2 population) total men women km2 population)

Volyn Oblast towns/cities with district rights 2003 Kowel 68,1 31,8 36,3 1461 100,0 Total 1046,1 492,0 554,0 52 49,7 Łuck 210,0 94,7 115,3 5073 100,0 districts: Nowowołyńsk 57,8 26,7 31,1 3409 100,0 Horochowski 56,8 26,3 30,5 51 26,2 Włodzimierz 38,5 17,9 20,6 2281 100,0 Wołyński Iwanicki 35,2 16,5 18,7 55 19,3 Kamieński 62,1 30,1 32,0 36 17,4 Tabl. 11. Population acording to economic age groups. Kiwercowski 66,1 31,3 34,8 47 38,3 Kowelski 42,7 20,0 22,7 25 19,4 2003 2011 Lubieszowski 36,9 18,2 18,7 25 14,9 List Lubomelski 42,5 20,3 22,2 29 31,5 total men women total men women

Łokaczyński 25,0 11,8 13,2 35 16,0 Lubelskie Voivodeship Łucki 58,0 27,3 30,7 60 10,2 Total 2191,2 1064,5 1126,6 2171,9 1053,0 1118,9 Maniewicki 57,2 27,6 29,6 25 24,7 including aged: Ratnowski 52,2 25,3 26,9 36 24,9 0-4 108,0 55,5 52,5 112,4 57,4 55,0 Rożyszczeński 42,6 19,9 22,7 46 35,9 5-9 127,9 65,2 62,7 103,2 53,0 50,2 Starowyżewski 33,4 15,9 17,5 30 15,3 10-14 160,3 82,2 78,1 114,8 58,9 55,9 Szacki 17,9 8,7 9,3 24 31,3 15-19 187,2 95,9 91,3 140,1 71,5 68,6 Turzyski 28,5 13,3 15,1 24 30,9 20-24 184,6 95,3 89,3 163,4 83,5 79,9 Włodzimierski 27,8 13,0 14,8 27 7,9 25-29 161,7 83,6 78,1 181,4 93,6 87,9 towns/cities with district rights 30-34 141,7 72,5 69,3 168,7 87,1 81,5 Kowel 66,0 31,0 34,9 1404 100,0 35-39 134,2 68,4 65,8 154,1 79,2 74,9 Łuck 199,5 90,8 108,6 4750 100,0 40-44 147,7 74,7 73,0 134,5 68,3 66,1 Nowowołyńsk 58,0 26,9 31,1 3412 100,0 45-49 169,6 84,5 85,0 135,7 68,3 67,4 Włodzimierz 37,7 17,7 20,0 2218 100,0 50-54 155,5 75,5 80,0 155,4 76,8 78,5 Wołyński 55-59 115,7 53,8 61,9 158,2 76,3 81,9 2011 60-64 89,0 39,8 49,2 132,8 60,6 72,2 Total 1035,9 487,1 548,8 52 51,9 65-69 90,8 39,4 51,4 84,5 36,2 48,3 districts: aged 70 217,3 78,2 139,1 232,7 82,1 150,5 Horochowski 53,2 24,8 28,4 47 28,2 and above Iwanicki 32,7 15,5 17,2 51 20,8 Brest Oblast Kamieński 63,2 30,6 32,6 36 18,9 Total 1450.1 682,5 767,6 1391,5 652,1 739,3 Kiwercowski 63,4 30,4 33,0 45 37,7 including aged: Kowelski 40,9 19,1 21,8 24 21,2 0-4 75,9 38,9 36,9 84,9 43,7 41,3 Lubieszowski 36,3 18,0 18,3 25 15,8 5-9 81,1 41,8 39,2 72,8 37,3 35,5 Lubomelski 39,8 19,0 20,8 27 33,2 10-14 104,4 53,4 51,0 76,1 39,0 37,1 Łokaczyński 23,0 10,9 12,1 32 17,0 15-19 115,5 59,5 56,0 81,3 42,5 38,8 Łucki 61,2 28,9 32,3 63 9,8 20-24 103,5 52,6 50,9 95,4 50,1 45,4 Maniewicki 55,3 26,9 28,4 24 26,4 25-29 102,5 51,3 51,3 105,6 54,0 51,7 Ratnowski 51,8 25,0 26,8 36 26,8 30-34 101,6 50,3 51,3 99,7 49,8 50,0 Rożyszczeński 40,3 18,9 21,4 43 38,1 35-39 103,1 51,0 52,1 99,3 48,5 50,8 Starowyżewski 30,9 14,9 16,0 28 16,8 40-44 118,9 58,6 60,3 96,8 47,2 49,6 Szacki 17,1 8,3 8,8 23 31,6 45-49 111,7 53,8 57,9 103,3 49,5 53,8 Turzyski 26,5 12,6 13,9 22 33,6 50-54 92,3 43,4 48,9 112,7 53,3 59,5 Włodzimierski 25,9 12,2 13,7 25 8,6

122 123 Tabl. 12. Natural population migration in voivodeships and oblasts. 2003 2011 List Natural Natural total men women total men women Live births Deaths increse Live births Deaths increse 55-59 66,8 30,3 36,6 91,2 40,9 50,2 List rate rate

60-64 62,4 26,4 36,0 77,8 33,3 44,5 total per 1000 persons 65-69 67,9 25,7 42,2 47,1 18,7 28,3 aged 70 Lubelskie Voivodeship and above 142,6 45,5 97,0 147,3 44,4 102,9 2003 21261 22807 -1546 9,7 10,4 -0,7 Lviv Oblast 2004 20794 22797 -2003 9,5 10,4 -0,9 Total 2579,9 1222,0 1358,0 2522,6 1192,9 1329,6 2005 21346 23182 -1836 9,8 10,6 -0,8 including aged: 2006 21496 22678 -1182 9,9 10,4 -0,5 0-4 120,0 61,2 58,7 142,5 73,2 69,3 2007 21795 23323 -1528 10,1 10,8 -0,7 5-9 145,5 74,5 71,0 126,4 64,6 61,8 2008 23009 23428 -419 10,6 10,8 -0,2 10-14 181,6 92,7 88,9 124,3 63,6 60,7 2009 22964 23703 -739 10,6 11,0 -0,3 15-19 214,9 110,2 104,7 162,2 82,9 79,3 2010 22635 23037 -402 10,4 10,6 -0,2 20-24 211,2 111,4 99,8 196,3 100,2 96,1 2011 21363 22981 -1618 9,8 10,6 -0,7 25-29 182,1 92,5 89,6 219,0 115,1 103,9 Brest Oblast 30-34 180,1 90,7 89,3 187,7 95,6 92,1 2003 14724 20427 -5703 10,2 14,1 -3,9 35-39 179,0 89,6 89,4 175,0 87,4 87,6 2004 14706 19975 -5269 10,2 13,9 -3,6 40-44 207,8 102,2 105,6 172,9 85,5 87,3 2005 14882 20346 -5464 10,4 14,2 -3,8 45-49 188,5 90,9 97,6 179,5 86,8 92,7 2006 15641 19438 -3797 11,0 13,7 -2,7 50-54 150,1 69,4 80,7 197,2 92,9 104,3 2007 16813 19019 -2206 11,9 13,5 -1,6 55-59 126,4 56,5 69,9 152,3 68,4 83,9 2008 17187 19265 -2078 12,2 13,7 -1,5 60-64 119,5 50,7 68,8 127,5 54,1 73,4 2009 17166 19596 -2430 12,2 14,0 -1,8 65-69 125,5 50,1 75,5 91,4 36,3 55,1 2010 17076 19956 -2880 12,2 14,3 -2,1 aged 70 2011 17635 19810 -2175 12,7 14,2 -1,5 and above 247,7 79,3 168,4 268,6 86,3 182,2 Lviv Oblast Volyn Oblast 2003 25009 34785 -9776 9,6 13,4 -3,8 Total : : : 1035,9 487,1 548,7 2004 26255 34087 -7832 10,1 13,2 -3,0 including aged: 2005 26082 35271 -9189 10,1 13,7 -3,6 0-4 : : : 73,4 38,1 35,3 2006 27272 34745 -7473 10,6 13,5 -2,9 5-9 : : : 61,7 31,8 29,9 2007 27454 34891 -7437 10,7 13,6 -2,9 10-14 : : : 59,3 30,5 28,8 2008 29007 35126 - 6119 11,4 13,8 -2,4 15-19 : : : 67,3 34,6 32,7 2009 30079 32848 -2769 11,8 12,9 -1,1 20-24 : : : 79,1 40,3 38,8 2010 28651 32644 -3993 11,2 12,8 -1,6 25-29 : : : 89,3 43,8 45,5 2011 28904 31162 -2258 11,4 12,3 -0,9 30-34 : : :: 78,5 39,3 39,2 Volyn Oblast 35-39 : : : 73,6 36,7 36,9 2003 11883 15459 -3576 11,3 14,7 -3,4 40-44 : : : 67,0 33,0 34,0 2004 12468 15175 -2707 11,9 14,5 -2,6 45-49 : : : 68,0 33,0 35,0 2005 12756 16012 -3256 12,2 15,4 -3,2 50-54 : : : 75,8 35,5 40,3 2006 13728 15615 -1887 13,2 15,0 -1,8 55-59 : : : 58,8 26,6 32,3 2007 13990 15471 -1481 13,5 14,9 -1,4 60-64 : : : 50,8 21,7 29,1 2008 15301 15594 -293 14,8 15,0 -0,2 65-69 : : : 31,0 12,1 18,9 2009 15290 14628 662 14,8 14,1 0,7 aged 70 : : : 102,3 30,2 72,1 2010 14848 14362 486 14,3 13,9 0,4 and above 2011 14620 13842 778 14,1 13,3 0,8

124 125 Tabl. 13. Natural population migration in voivodeships and oblasts in 2011. Live Natural Live Natural Deaths increse Deaths increse births rate births rate Live Natural Live Natural List Deaths increse Deaths increse births rate births rate List total per 1000 persons

total per 1000 persons Prużański 544 1002 -458 10,7 19,7 -9,0 Stolinecki 1108 1302 -194 14,2 16,6 -2,4 Lubelskie 21363 22981 -1618 9,8 10,6 -0,7 Voivodeship Żabinecki 331 375 -44 13,3 15,1 -1,8 Poviats: Cities and towns with district rights Bialski 1194 1374 -180 10,5 12,0 -1,6 Baranowicze 2080 2014 66 12,3 11,9 0,4 Biłgorajski 974 1101 -127 9,4 10,6 -1,2 Brześć 4204 2932 1272 13,2 9,2 4,0 Chełmski 814 999 -185 10,1 12,4 -2,3 Pińsk 1700 1350 350 12,8 10,1 2,7 Hrubieszowski 601 827 -226 8,8 12,1 -3,3 Lviv Oblast 28904 31162 -2258 11,4 12,3 -0,9 Janowski 440 545 -105 9,2 11,4 -2,2 Districts Krasnostawski 569 909 -340 8,4 13,5 -5,0 Brodzki 646 895 -249 10,7 14,8 -4,1 Kraśnicki 900 1028 -128 9,0 10,3 -1,3 Buski 617 717 -100 13,3 15,4 -2,1 Lubartowski 1021 1044 -23 11,3 11,5 -0,3 Drohobycki 914 1 096 -182 12,3 14,7 -2,4 Lubelski 1493 1518 -25 10,2 10,3 -0,2 Gródecki 830 973 -143 12,0 14,0 -2,0 Łęczyński 658 480 178 11,4 8,3 3,1 Jaworowski 1 770 1 250 520 14,3 10,1 4,2 Łukowski 1293 1048 245 11,8 9,5 2,2 Kamionecki 746 821 -75 13,0 14,3 -1,3 Opolski 620 755 -135 9,9 12,0 -2,2 Mościski 716 812 -96 12,5 14,1 -1,6 Parczewski 390 419 -29 10,7 11,5 -0,8 Mikołajowski 801 809 -8 12,6 12,8 -0,2 Puławski 1053 1211 -158 9,0 10,3 -1,4 Przemyslański 490 752 -262 12,2 18,7 -6,5 Radzyński 685 702 -17 11,2 11,4 -0,3 Pustomycki 1 355 1 420 -65 12,0 12,6 -0,6 Rycki 550 661 -111 9,3 11,2 -1,9 Radziechowski 572 700 -128 11,8 14,4 -2,6 Świdnicki 675 775 -100 9,2 10,6 -1,4 Samborski 830 937 -107 11,9 13,5 -1,6 Tomaszowski 843 1013 -170 9,6 11,5 -1,9 Skolski 759 728 31 16,0 15,4 0,6 Włodawski 411 465 -54 10,3 11,6 -1,4 Sokalski 1 082 1 272 -190 11,6 13,6 -2,0 Zamojski 1019 1331 -312 9,3 12,1 -2,8 Starosamborski 909 1 121 -212 11,6 14,3 -2,7 Towns/cities with poviat rights Stryjski 709 803 -94 11,4 12,9 -1,5 Biała Podlaska 576 408 168 9,9 7,0 2,9 Turczański 800 693 107 15,9 13,8 2,1 Chełm 566 609 -43 8,5 9,2 -0,7 Złoczowski 774 1 002 -228 11,0 14,3 -3,3 Lublin 3471 3263 208 9,9 9,4 0,6 Żółkiewski 1 380 1 341 39 12,6 12,3 0,3 Zamość 547 496 51 8,3 7,5 0,8 Żydaczowski 776 1 251 -475 10,9 17,5 -6,6 Brest Oblast 17635 19810 -2175 12,7 14,2 -1,5 Cities and towns with district rights Districts Borysław 417 489 -72 11,2 13,2 -2,0 Baranowicki 518 903 -385 12,8 22,3 -9,5 Drohobycz 974 1 007 -33 9,9 10,2 -0,3 Berezowski 783 970 -187 11,9 14,7 -2,8 Lwów 7 604 7 892 -288 10,0 10,4 -0,4 Brzeski 607 604 3 15,4 15,3 0,1 Morszyn 59 51 8 9,7 8,4 1,3 Drohiczyński 481 850 -369 11,7 20,7 -9,0 Nowy Rozdól 304 196 108 10,6 6,8 3,8 Hancewicki 339 514 -175 11,3 17,1 -5,8 Sambor 382 397 -15 10,9 11,3 -0,4 Iwacewicki 667 1015 -348 11,5 17,5 -6,0 Stryj 588 623 -35 9,8 10,3 -0,5 Janowski 547 801 -254 12,9 18,9 -6,0 Truskawiec 208 198 10 7,0 6,7 0,3 Kamieniecki 486 605 -119 12,8 16,0 -3,2 Czerwonogród 892 916 -24 10,8 11,1 -0,3 Kobryński 1182 1265 -83 13,6 14,6 -1,0 Volyn Oblast 14620 13842 778 14,1 13,3 0,8 Lachowicki 294 655 -361 10,1 22,5 -12,4 Districts Łuniniecki 851 1058 -207 11,9 14,8 -2,9 Horochowski 637 889 -252 11,9 16,6 -4,7 Małorycki 337 420 -83 13,4 16,7 -3,3 Iwanicki 390 514 -124 11,9 15,6 -3,7 Piński 576 1175 -599 11,6 23,6 -12,0 Kamieński 1189 770 419 19,0 12,3 6,7

126 127 Natural Natural Live Live Immigtation Emigration Migration balance Deaths increse Deaths increse births rate births rate List List including including per 1000 total from total total abroad persons total per 1000 persons abroad

Kiwercowski 1039 911 128 16,2 14,2 2,0 Lviv Oblast Kowelski 583 728 -145 14,4 17,9 -3,5 2003 32293 464 35201 1587 -2908 -1,1 Lubieszowski 579 482 97 16,1 13,4 2,7 2004 32919 562 35357 1138 -2438 -0,9 Lubomelski 569 635 -66 14,3 15,9 -1,6 2005 33187 537 34910 944 -1723 -0,7 Łokaczyński 283 337 -54 12,3 14,7 -2,4 2006 33248 531 34491 811 -1243 -0,5 Łucki 944 785 159 15,5 12,9 2,6 2007 32293 522 33490 723 -1197 -0,5 Maniewicki 872 788 84 15,8 14,3 1,5 2008 31106 549 31837 582 -731 -0,3 Ratnowski 836 705 131 16,2 13,6 2,6 2009 29511 529 30054 636 -543 -0,2 Rożyszczeński 619 643 -24 15,3 15,9 -0,6 2010 31857 516 32733 574 -876 -0,3 Starowyżewski 452 515 -63 14,6 16,7 -2,1 2011 30172 601 31724 563 -1552 -0,6 Szacki 219 299 -80 12,8 17,5 -4,7 Volyn Oblast Turzyski 399 478 -79 15,1 18,0 -2,9 2003 14178 434 16514 1262 -2336 -2,2 Włodzimierski 379 445 -66 14,8 17,3 -2,5 2004 18669 460 19973 1001 -1304 -1,2 2005 18706 469 19798 901 -1092 -1,0 Cities and towns with district rights Kowel 1002 737 265 14,6 10,8 3,8 2006 19749 445 20263 806 -514 -0,5 Łuck 2607 1981 626 12,3 9,3 3,0 2007 19973 528 20084 865 -111 -0,1 Nowowołyńsk 647 734 -87 11,2 12,7 -1,5 2008 19053 590 18975 541 78 0,0 Włodzimierz 2009 17072 470 17290 437 -218 -0,3 375 466 -91 9,7 12,0 -2,3 Wołyński 2010 17718 479 17720 372 -2 0,0 2011 17253 485 16582 289 671 0,6 Tabl. 14. Natural population migration in voivodeships and oblasts. Tabl. 15.Migration in 2011r. Immigtation Emigration Migration balance

List including including per 1000 total from total total Immigtation Emigration Migration balance abroad persons abroad List including Lubelskie Voivodeship including per 1000 total from total total abroad persons 2003 23808 161 28378 155 -4570 -2,1 abroad 2004 23808 273 28268 182 -4460 -2,0 Lubelskie 20642 407 25778 583 -5136 -2,4 2005 23421 331 28322 327 -4901 -2,2 Voivodeship 2006 24903 270 31496 1703 -6593 -3,0 Poviats: 2007 28152 537 33903 1145 -5751 -2,6 Bialski 1128 9 1256 20 -128 -1,1 2008 20711 524 25144 839 -4433 -2,0 Biłgorajski 811 18 1059 14 -248 -2,4 2009 20643 576 24796 492 -4153 -1,9 Chełmski 877 16 1032 10 -155 -1,9 2010 21071 421 25976 459 -4905 -2,3 Hrubieszowski 567 15 994 16 -427 -6,2 2011 20642 407 25778 583 -5136 -2,4 Janowski 349 23 511 23 -162 -3,4 Krasnostawski 654 18 750 9 -96 -1,4 Brest Oblast 2003 32935 3056 35292 1800 -2357 -1,6 Kraśnicki 773 27 1019 49 -246 -2,5 2004 33903 2214 36514 1549 -2611 -1,8 Lubartowski 959 39 1028 26 -69 -0,8 2005 33345 1790 37224 1461 -3879 -2,7 Lubelski 2470 18 1501 18 969 6,6 2006 36062 2050 38398 1139 -2336 -1,6 Łęczyński\ 726 4 926 23 -200 -3,5 2007 35843 2076 38059 1260 -2216 -1,6 Łukowski 798 7 1344 11 -546 -5,0 2008 36895 2205 36783 1221 112 0,1 Opolski 570 8 835 35 -265 -4,2 2009 39583 2624 42476 1060 -2893 -2,1 Parczewski 325 6 465 8 -140 -3,9 2010 34431 2848 35967 941 -1536 -1,1 Puławski 1113 21 1294 43 -181 -1,6 2011 31369 3519 32386 931 -1017 -0,7 Radzyński 478 5 728 6 -250 -4,1

128 129 Immigtation Emigration Migration balance Immigtation Emigration Migration balance

List including List including including per 1000 including per 1000 total from total total total from total total abroad persons abroad persons abroad abroad Rycki 540 3 888 3 -348 -5,9 Radziechowski 630 657 -27 -0,6 Świdnicki 848 21 850 74 -2 0,0 Samborski 887 956 -69 -1,0 Tomaszowski 774 21 1172 25 -398 -4,5 Skolski 696 531 165 3,5 Włodawski 441 9 618 12 -177 -4,4 Sokalski 1 221 1131 90 0,9 Zamojski 1200 26 1278 12 -78 -0,7 Starosamborski 1226 1030 196 2,5 Towns/cities with poviat rights Stryjski 812 684 128 2,1 Biała Podlaska 476 8 695 9 -219 -3,8 Turczański 551 668 -117 -2,3 Chełm 585 39 903 23 -318 -4,8 Złoczowski 927 904 23 0,3 Lublin 2631 28 3755 87 -1124 -3,2 Żółkiewski 1 370 1531 -161 -1,5 Zamość 549 18 877 27 -328 -5,0 Żydaczowski 800 903 -103 -1,4 Brest Oblast 31369 3519 32386 931 -1017 -0,7 Cities and towns with district rights: Districts: Borysław 487 461 26 0,7 Baranowicki 1175 79 1334 33 -159 -3,9 Drohobycz 1354 1931 -577 -5,9 Berezowski 1625 140 2214 37 -589 -8,9 Lwów 8 567 10175 -1608 -2,1 Brzeski 1202 168 1015 24 187 4,7 Morszyn 49 101 -52 -11,4 Drohiczyński 637 32 1328 15 -691 -16,8 Nowy Rozdól 539 436 103 3,6 Hancewicki 793 40 1220 20 -427 -14,2 Sambor 571 615 -44 -1,3 Iwacewicki 1402 89 2001 38 -599 -10,3 Stryj 943 1029 -86 -1,4 Janowski 981 62 1511 14 -530 -12,5 Truskawiec 302 418 -116 -5,5 Kamieniecki 636 58 1117 17 -481,0 -12,7 Czerwonogród 972 979 -7 -0,1 Kobryński 1870 187 2344 74 -474 -5,5 Volyn Oblast 17253 485 16582 289,0 671,0 0,6 Lachowicki 571 10 987 5 -416 -14,3 Districts: Łuniniecki 1258 77 2013 1 -755 -10,6 Horochowski 663 14 950 4,0 -287,0 -5,3 Małorycki 406 114 576 21 -170 -6,7 Iwanicki 393 8 538 8,0 -145,0 -4,3 Piński 1280 98 1768 36 -488 -9,8 Kamieński 766 38 815 17,0 -49,0 -0,8 Prużański 994 168 1373 35 -379 -7,5 Kiwercowski 1082 30 1251 8,0 -169,0 -2,7 Stolinecki 969 30 2030 5 -1061 -13,6 Kowelski 677 10 709 12,0 -32,0 -0,9 Żabinecki 625 90 629 - -4 -0,2 Lubieszowski 402 7 350 18,0 52,0 1,5 Cities and towns with district rights: Lubomelski 480 5 461 2,0 19,0 0,4 Baranowicze 3792 314 3111 147 681 4 Łokaczyński 218 11 266 6,0 -48,0 -2,1 Brześć 7240 1595 3416 288 3824 12,0 Łucki 1520 39 1095 22,0 425,0 7,0 Pińsk 3913 168 2399 121 1514 11,4 Maniewicki 812 13 933 11,0 -121,0 0,0 Lviv Oblast 30172 601 31724 563 -1552 -0,6 Ratnowski 724 49 753 20,0 -29,0 -0,6 Districts: Rożyszczeński 249 4 449 6,0 -200,0 -4,9 Brodzki 672 745 -73 -1,2 Starowyżewski 345 11 388 1,0 -43,0 -1,4 Buski 630 601 29 0,7 Szacki 243 8 189 6,0 54,0 3,1 Drohobycki 1054 786 268 3,6 Turzyski 557 12 574 − -17,0 -0,6 Gródecki 485 470 15 0,2 Włodzimierski 599 9 511 4,0 88,0 3,4 Jaworowski 1 203 1233 -30 -0,3 Cities and towns with district rights: Kamionecki 503 533 -30 -0,5 Kowel 1088 45 876 14,0 212,0 3,1 Mościski 577 459 118 2,1 Łuck 4491 118 3837 95,0 654,0 3,0 Mikołajowski 608 701 -93 -1,5 Nowowołyńsk 898 39 698 29,0 200,0 3,4 Przemyslański 337 413 -76 -1,9 Włodzimierz 1046 15 939 6,0 107,0 2,8 Wołyński Pustomycki 1 199 643 556 4,9

130 131 Tabl. 16. Natural growth increase and migration balance (per 1000 persons). Transport and border infrastructure

Tabl. 18. Transport infrastructure List 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Public roads Public roads Number of Natural increse rate: with hard Used railways with hard Used railways passenger surface surface cars Lubelskie List (in Voivodeship -0,7 -0,9 -0,8 -0,5 -0,7 -0,2 -0,3 -0,2 -0,7 in km per 100 km2 of surface in km thousands) Brest Oblast -3,9 -3,6 -3,8 -2,7 -1,6 -1,5 -1,8 -2,1 -1,5 Lubelskie Voivodeship Lviv Oblast -3,8 -3,0 -3,6 -2,9 -2,9 -2,4 -1,1 -1,6 -0,9 2003 9445,0 1066,0 28,8 3,3 : Volyn Oblast -3.4 -2,6 -3,2 -1,8 -1,4 -0,2 0,7 0,4 0,8 2011 10462,0 1062,0 31,9 3,2 418,3 Migration balance Brest Oblast Lubelskie Voivodeship -2,1 -2,0 -2,2 -3,0 -2,6 -2,0 -1,9 -2,3 -2,4 2003 17900,0 1049,0 71,2 4,2 573,3 Brest Oblast -1,6 -1,8 -2,7 -1,6 -1,6 0,1 -2,1 -1,1 -0,7 2011 21325,1 1041,0 84,9 4,1 953,3 Lviv Oblast -1,1 -0,9 -0,7 -0,5 -0,5 -0,3 -0,2 -0,3 -0,6 Lviv Oblast Volyn Oblast -2.2 -1,2 -1,0 -0,5 - 0,1 0,0 -0,3 0,0 0,6 2003 8100,0 1292,2 37,3 5,9 226,8 2011 8198,9 1269,0 37,6 5,8 290,9 Tabl. 17. The employed according to economic sectors, unemployed and average monthly gross Volyn Oblast remuneration. 2003 5700,0 614,2 28,1 3,0 103,7

The employed 2011 5761,0 596,8 28,5 3,0 132,6 including according to sectors: Average Regis- Unem- monthly tered ployment gross List unem- rate Agriculture remuneration Higher education, tourism and culture total ployment according forestry, industry and servic- in national rate to BAEL hunting construction es currencies Tabl. 19. Higher education and ﬁ shery

Number of Students Lubelskie Voivodeship institutes List including total of full time Per 1000 2003 725,3 278,3 133,1 313,9 18,7 16,0 1907,96 of higher total education women studies persons 2011 803,6 308,0 143,5 352,1 13,2 10,3 3066,32 Lubelskie Voivodeship Brest Oblast 2003 18 98085 57910 51151 44,8 2003 606,0 107,0 185,8 313,2 3,8 : : 2011 18 96187 58527 61509 44,3 2011 641,8 92,7 216,2 332,9 0,7 : 1646800,00 Brest Oblast Lviv Oblast 2003 4 22653 14500 12741 15,6 2003 1141,9 278,0 270,7 593,2 3,9 10,3 419,14 2011 4 36850 23005 18007 26,5 2011 1100,7 204,3 242,0 654,4 1,5 7,7 2244,00 Lviv Oblast Volyn Oblast 2003 30 110086 58711 67845 42,4 2003 436,0 138,5 70,3 227,2 4,9 : 318,82 2011 440,1 116,1 66,8 257,2 1,8 8,3 1994,00 2011 22 131243 65004 86781 51,7 Volyn Oblast 2003 7 20967 12387 11816 20,0 2011 15 31691 18607 20624 30,6

132 133 Tabl. 20. PhD students

Number of institutes of List higher education Number of PhD students offering PhD studies Lubelskie Voivodeship 2003 5 3183 2011 5 2799 Brest Oblast 2003 2 119 2011 4 92 Lviv Oblast 2003 30 1917 2011 33 2787 Volyn Oblast 2003 2 244 2011 2 462

Tabl. 21. Tourist accommodation facilities

Accommodation Guests provided facilities (in thousands) accom- List List including mo-dation total annually total foreign (in thou- touristsi sands) Lubelskie Voivodeship

2003 178 11807 4241 290,7 706,1

2011 273 18 232 11 870 655,1 97,7 1 487,7

Brest Oblast

2003 105 10100 8711 282,9 31,587 2020,8

2011 129 11 009 9 877 405,3 130,1 2 054,4

Lviv Oblast

2003 195 25942 22302 422,1 4659,8

2011 317 30 295 16 297 627,2 123,2 4246,1

Volyn Oblast

2003 28 2108 2108 91,2 6,9 182,2

2011 130 5 954 3 135 116,7 8,5 594,6

134 135 9 ISBN 978-83-942280-2-6 7 8 8 3 9 4 2 2 8 0 2 6

136